Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au nom de la santé publique, des médecins de plusieurs pays promeuvent, à la fin du xixe siècle, l’incinération funéraire. Au Québec, certains médecins hygiénistes se persuadent ainsi des vertus sanitaires de la crémation, mais ne prennent aucun moyen pour contribuer à en faire une option funéraire accessible à tous. L’importance publique du catholicisme québécois peut expliquer pourquoi ces médecins ne soutiennent la crémation que dans le cas de certains morts de maladies contagieuses ou d’ordures urbaines. Se manifester comme crématistes dans le domaine funéraire impliquerait, pour ces médecins, de défier le clergé catholique, fermement opposé à l’incinération des morts et qui possède la plupart des lieux de sépulture sur le territoire. Retracer ces polémiques sur la crémation funéraire permet d’exposer les conflits qu’elle cause entre médecine hygiéniste et catholicisme au Québec.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.199 | 0.045 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".