MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303437859 · doi:10.7202/1091806ar

L’arrivée des Acadiens au Québec : mythes et vérités

2020· article· fr· W4303437859 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
André-Carl Vachon

Bibliographic record

VenuePort Acadie Revue interdisciplinaire en études acadiennes · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité Sainte-Anne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combien d’Acadiens et d’Acadiennes ont migré sur le territoire québécois entre 1755 et 1775 ? Comment ces familles et individus s’y sont-ils rendus ? Comment ont-ils été accueillis ? Alors que les réponses diffèrent selon les chercheurs, l’arrivée des réfugiés acadiens en Nouvelle-France et dans la province de Québec demeure voilée de légendes. Cet article a pour but de jeter un nouvel éclairage sur ces questions, tout en examinant la provenance des mythes entourant les faits historiques. Notre étude exploite une base de données constituée à partir des registres de catholicité pour la période mentionnée, et augmentée en consultant le Programme de recherche en démographie historique de l’Université de Montréal ainsi que les actes notariés qui se trouvent dans Parchemin, banque de données notariales du Québec ancien 1626-1799 de la Société de recherche historique Archiv-Histo. Il s’agit non seulement de préciser le nombre et les multiples parcours des Acadiens venus au Québec pendant le Grand Dérangement, mais aussi de cerner les conditions matérielles et sociopolitiques qui forment le contexte de ce mouvement migratoire à l’origine d’une partie importante de l’actuelle diaspora acadienne.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePort Acadie Revue interdisciplinaire en études acadiennesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207