Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article fait un court survol synthétique de l’histoire des couvre-feux au Québec. La mesure existe depuis les débuts de la présence européenne, mais le rythme de son implantation ne suit pas une chronologie inéluctable de progrès vers la liberté. Aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles, il s’agit d’une mesure rare, à portée limitée, utilisée uniquement en temps de guerre. Au XIXe siècle, le couvre-feu n’est jamais utilisé, car perçu comme une pratique moyenâgeuse et liberticide. Au XXe siècle, le couvre-feu renaît, comme mesure ciblée de régulation sociale, visant surtout les jeunes. Quelle que soit la période, il ne s’agit jamais d’une mesure imposée à l’échelle coloniale ou provinciale. Les couvre-feux imposés au Québec sont uniquement urbains et relèvent des autorités locales, surtout municipales. Autant dans leur ampleur que par l’autorité qui les impose, les mesures de confinement adoptées en 2021 et 2022 pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 sont tout à fait inédites dans l’histoire du Québec.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".