Sociogénétique de la dollarisation : l’institution monétaire de la société canadienne, 1654 –1871
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette these s’interesse aux forces sociales qui president a la structuration des systemes monetaires nationaux. A travers l’exemple de l’histoire monetaire et financiere coloniale canadienne (1654-1871) il s’agit de comprendre la mecanique et la logique de l’uniformisation des pratiques monetaires de compte et de paiement sur un territoire donne, en particulier suite a l’immixtion et a la circulation d’une monnaie allogene - dollarisation -. Durant cette periode on assiste a un « basculement comptable » de la socio-economie coloniale au profit d’une unite de compte privee et d’origine allogene, le dollar. Cette victoire du « prive » contre le « public » procede de la formation d’un puissant consensus sur la monnaie, qui s’apparente a une energie sociale endogene dont il s’agit de faire la sociologie historique dynamique. Bâtissant sur l’acquis institutionnaliste nous nous concentrons sur les processus d’adhesion et de luttes sociales. Avec les outils offerts par la sociologie interdependantiste de Norbert Elias nous proposons de penser la genese historique des monnaies a partir de « regimes d’interdependances » interne et externe au systeme monetaire. Enfn nous nous interessons a la dimension qualitative de ce processus en regardant le role des spheres d’echanges, des conversions et des interfaces dans la circulation des monnaies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
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".