L’intimité française avec la « sauvagerie » à Montréal aux 17 e -18 e siècles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Croiser les écrits coloniaux avec les verbatim des procès impliquant Français et Autochtones à Montréal aux 17 e et 18 e siècles permet de confronter la parole d’en bas à celle d’en haut. Les effets de vérité que les justiciables pensent donner à leurs arguments révèlent une connivence cognitive partagée tant par les témoins et acteurs autochtones et français que par le juge et le greffier. Ils pointent vers la banalité des attitudes et des représentations communément admises, mais contrastent avec celles des auteurs de relations missionnaires, récits de voyage et correspondances officielles. L’exercice fait découvrir des microsites d’intimité franco-autochtone qui, existant dans le quotidien des peuples, touchent ce qui est de l’ordre de la normalité familière pour les gens d’en bas et de l’anormalité exotique pour les gens d’en haut, en particulier en ce qui concerne les tempéraments jugés dégoûtants, violents, intempérants et incontrôlés.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.001 |
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".