MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288459125 · doi:10.4000/com.13599

Les marquages funéraires mapuche comme enjeux de résistances identitaires : du cimetière « colonial » de Temuco aux Eltún des communautés rurales de l’Araucanie (Chili)

2022· article· fr· W4288459125 on OpenAlexaff
Camille Varnier

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers d Outre-Mer · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À travers une étude de la diversité des cimetières dans la région d’Araucanie au sud du Chili et des logiques d’appropriation différenciées de ces espaces funéraires, cet article propose une réflexion scalaire des processus de résistances identitaires mapuche et des multiples formes de revendications, individuelles et collectives, qui s’expriment après leurs morts, sur leurs tombes. Dans un contexte social et politique divisé où les Mapuche, principal peuple autochtone du pays, sont aujourd’hui encore largement marginalisés et discriminés sur ce qui reste de leur territoire ancestral – ou Wallmapu –, l’accent est mis sur la place qu’ils occupent dans ces cimetières et sur la visibilité de leurs marquages symboliques, depuis l’échelle de Temuco (capitale régionale), jusqu’à celle des communautés rurales des communes de Galvarino, Chol-Chol ou encore d’Ercilla, afin d’interroger et de comparer les différentes formes de résistances à des échelles variées. En effet, bien que les Mapuche soient présents en ville, les mouvements de lutte pour la défense de leur culture et de leur territoire s’organisent avant tout au sein des zones les plus reculées et moins denses de l’Araucanie.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers d Outre-MerSame topicIndigenous Cultures and HistoryFrench-language works237,207