MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313056480 · doi:10.7202/1086826ar

S’adapter pour rester : continuités basques aux xviie et xviiie siècles

2022· article· fr· W4313056480 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brad Loewen, Saraí Barreiro Argüelles, Catherine Cottreau-Robins

Bibliographic record

VenueArchéologiques · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia HospitalDepartment of Communities, Culture and HeritageUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce travail fait le point sur les recherches et idées récentes concernant les Basques dans le golfe du Saint-Laurent et en Acadie atlantique. Des découvertes nouvelles et le retour aux collections existantes ont amplifié la liste des sites basques connus, et ce, dans plusieurs régions. Les recherches en archives ont progressé également, identifiant les lieux de pêche basque dans le sud du golfe, et les lieux d’enterrement de marins décédés. Ce travail révèle la complexité des activités basques selon trois thèmes : la diversité des activités basques, le rapport des Basques d’Espagne avec le pouvoir colonial français, et les rapports entre Basques et Autochtones au xviie siècle, en particulier les Inuits et les Mi’kmaq. Ces thèmes synthétisent les adaptations des Basques au contexte historique qui ne cesse d’évoluer au cours des 250 ans de leur présence. Puisque ces adaptations variaient dans l’espace, ce texte présente les recherches et idées récentes selon quatre régions : la Grande Baie, le sud de Terre-Neuve, l’Acadie atlantique et l’Acadie laurentienne.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

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 studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchéologiquesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207