Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seuls ceux qui sont peu sociologues s'étonneront du fait que le Canada français, si solidement encadré par des structures ecclésiastiques et si impérieusement influencé par des contrôles religieux, possède une littérature scientifique encore si hésitante sur ces questions. Peut-être ceci est-il causé par cela ? Nous reviendrons sur cette interrogation. Établissons auparavant le bilan des études religieuses de caractère scientifique ou d'intérêt durable sur notre milieu. Est-il besoin de préciser que nous n'inclurons, dans cet inventaire, que les études empiriques ? Seront donc écartés de notre champ de vision les mandements officiels de la hiérarchie, les travaux doctrinaux et apologétiques, les exposés pastoraux, les innombrables écrits d'intention morale et moralisante ayant eu comme objectif de redresser des torts. Si nous parlons surtout du présent, c'est que notre passé scientifique date au plus d'avant-hier.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.221 | 0.082 |
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".