MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159795712 · doi:10.4000/norois.10338

Patrimoine culturel et territoire : le cas des Cholos en Équateur

2020· article· fr· W3159795712 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNorois · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 2001, invoquant leur patrimoine ancestral, des pêcheurs du littoral centre-sud équatorien, bien que considérés comme métis par le reste du pays, se présentent comme des Amérindiens hispanophones. Ils s’auto-définissent comme Cholos, i.e. des Indiens de la côte équatorienne. Ce phénomène singulier de réindigénisation est indissociable de la question de l’accès à la terre et de la préservation du territoire, dans le cadre du système juridique des comunas, qui prévaut sur le littoral équatorien. Il ne s’agit pas ici de rendre compte du débat sur la nature de l’identité chola – les Cholos de la côte sont-ils des Amérindiens ou bien des Métis ? –, mais de comprendre les stratégies de la réindigénisation des comunas s’auto-définissant comme cholas, à la lumière des modalités et des enjeux de la revitalisation de leur patrimoine immatériel, mis en évidence tant au niveau des pratiques culturelles que d’un discours à caractère politique.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it