MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197454173 · doi:10.7202/1080161ar

Déploiements des archives, altérité et espaces de mémoires relationnels : pour une archivistique éthique anticoloniale

2021· article· fr· W3197454173 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
François Dansereau

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans un contexte où la communauté archivistique internationale insiste sur la nécessité pour les nations autochtones d’être en contrôle des archives qui les concernent, cet article expose différentes problématiques qui nous amènent à réfléchir sur les particularités de l’environnement archivistique au Québec. En premier lieu, il signale les composantes coloniales de la production d’archives sur l’Île de la Tortue (Amérique du Nord) et la contribution des conceptions archivistiques traditionnelles au colonialisme d’implantation. Évoquant des énoncés mis en lumière par l’archivistique communautaire et les valeurs émancipatrices de l’archivistique, cet article propose une exploration de variables et paradigmes orientés vers la décolonisation des espaces de mémoire et des concepts archivistiques au Québec. Il fait ainsi part de l’effet structurant de l’archivistique et de la nécessité d’un engagement avec les conceptions de mémoire et ontologies autochtones afin de favoriser un développement de connaissances éthique. Cet article évoque alors le rôle, les responsabilités et les limites des archivistes et des institutions de mémoire concernant la résurgence autochtone.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.041
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207