MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297927359 · doi:10.3917/mouv.091.0015

L’Océanie peut-elle être décolonisée ?

2017· article· fr· W4297927359 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMouvements · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNew Caledonia Indigenous Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtColonisationGeographyColonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invisible dans l’historiographie de la colonisation, tout comme dans celle de la décolonisation, la Nouvelle-Calédonie appartient à cet espace géographique oublié du monde colonisé, l’Océanie. Les situations coloniales diverses qui se rencontrent dans cette partie du globe, une fois rappelé leur contexte historique et politique, permettent d’appréhender le sort spécifique de la population kanak de Nouvelle-Calédonie sous un jour nouveau. Longtemps victime d’une colonisation de peuplement, la sortie du colonialisme, comme le suggèrent les cas de l’Australie et de la Nouvelle-Zélande, engage pour le peuple kanak bien plus qu’un surcroît d’autonomie ou le recouvrement d’une souveraineté nationale.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.290 · 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