MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312466911 · doi:10.17118/11143/19254

Défendre sa/ses langues : quels mots pour le dire ? Le cas de l’amazigh au Maroc

2021· article· fr· W4312466911 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCircula · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Le traitement des langues au Maroc est fortement associé aux aspects politiques, idéologiques,
\néducatifs, identitaires que l’on peut observer dans un pays marqué par une dynamique sociale assez
\nsoutenue. La valorisation d’une langue ou sa minoration va de pair avec l’attitude qui prévaut à
\nl’égard des langues de la communication quotidienne et de la culture populaire dans ses versants
\narabophone et amazighophone. Le fossé n’a pas cessé de se creuser depuis très longtemps, entre
\nune culture savante, élitiste, dominante et une culture dite "de masse", reléguée au second plan,
\ndépréciée. La distribution des biens culturels et linguistiques participe d’un rapport de force régi
\npar des considérations que les différents antagonistes rattachent à différentes sphères : identitaire,
\nculturelle, économique, religieuse, etc. [...]"

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.220 · 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