MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178280657 · doi:10.7202/1078490ar

Université de l’Ontario français. Lorsqu’une vague médiatique soulève un enjeu de société

2021· article· fr· W3178280657 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
François-René Lord

Bibliographic record

VenueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinaires · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La création d’une nouvelle université au Canada est un phénomène peu commun. La fondation de l’Université de l’Ontario français (UOF), première université entièrement francophone en Ontario, revêt ainsi une importance primordiale pour la communauté franco-ontarienne, notamment pour la préservation de sa langue et de sa culture. L’annonce de l’abandon du financement de ce projet par le gouvernement progressiste-conservateur ontarien, le 15 décembre 2018, secoue cette population. Les médias canadiens traitent alors abondamment cette nouvelle. Nous proposons, dans cet article, une analyse à la fois quantitative et qualitative de 2405 articles de journaux couvrant cette période charnière dans la courte histoire de l’UOF. Notre étude révèle notamment que le journalLe Droit, le site de Radio-Canada et la plate-forme numérique ONfr+sont les médias ayant le plus traité de la création de l’UOF et qu’une plus grande proportion (60 %) des textes de notre corpus sont écrits en français. Le processus de médiatisation de l’UOF est marqué par une amplification médiatique de typemedia-hypeoù les journalistes utilisent la personnification, la représentation antagoniste des acteurs et le ton parfois émotif et acrimonieux pour cadrer la nouvelle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinairesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207