MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237705576 · doi:10.3138/uhr.47.1-2.04

L’émeute des tramways de Montréal (1955) et la mauvaise conduite des étudiantsߙ: un cas d’appropriation de l’espace urbain

2018· article· fr· W4237705576 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Daniel Poitras

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’émeute des tramways de 1955, qui a paralysé Montréal pendant toute une journée, demeure un épisode méconnu de l’histoire de la ville. Précédée par deux journées de manifestations, impliquant des étudiants et de jeunes «ߙvoyousߙ», l’émeute a déclenché une série de réactions qui ont mis en lumière de quelle façon différentes autorités (municipales, journalistiques, universitaires) percevaient le rôle de la jeunesse et les dangers de la délinquance. La clémence accordée aux étudiants et la sévérité à l’égard des autres jeunes a révélé comment la «ߙmauvaise conduite élitaireߙ» des premiers était non seulement validée par les autorités, mais également au cœur de la reproduction de l’ordre social. Si les étudiants étaient partie prenante de cette reproduction, ils ont aussi utilisé l’émeute pour enclencher une série de réflexions, particulièrement à l’Université McGill et à l’Université de Montréal, sur l’autonomie universitaire et la nécessité de créer un mouvement étudiant élargi capable de canaliser l’énergie des parades estudiantines pour transformer les corps étudiants en acteurs de la scène municipale.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.232 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban History ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207