MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200314678 · doi:10.4000/assr.59792

Difficultés et enjeux des études quantitatives de la minorité protestante française

2021· article· fr· W4200314678 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Paul Willaime

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives de sciences sociales des religions · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsCentre Jeunesse de Quebec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis 1980, les protestants de France se sont accoutumés à la publication régulière d’enquêtes statistiques les concernant. Ces enquêtes se sont développées dans un moment marqué par la montée du courant évangélique en France, mais aussi par l’essor d’un protestantisme multiculturel lié principalement à l’installation de communautés issues de l’immigration dans les grandes villes et leurs banlieues. Les enquêtes par sondage mesurent donc la complexification interne de la micro-minorité protestante en France, et questionnent une identité collective traditionnellement dominée par les courants « historiques » de la Réforme. Les enquêtes statistiques, et l’interprétation de leurs résultats, deviennent ainsi un enjeu de représentation de soi et de visibilité du protestantisme, dans une société française où la sécularisation s’accompagne d’une pluralisation religieuse. L’article analyse ces différents enjeux en s’appuyant sur les travaux existants. Dans une démarche réflexive, l’auteur y revient aussi sur sa propre participation à ces enquêtes et à leur interprétation, et sur les conclusions qu’il peut en tirer au plan sociologique et épistémologique.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.014
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives de sciences sociales des religionsSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207