MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377965713 · doi:10.1017/9781108773751.006

Humanizing Maternal and Child Welfare in Dakar, 1949–1956

2023· book-chapter· en· W4377965713 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizenshipColonialismPolitical scienceAutonomyGender studiesWelfare stateState (computer science)WelfareRemittancePoliticsEconomic growthSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter 5 focuses on the Union of Eurafricans in FWA, which became the Union of Eurafricans of Black Africa, and its founder Nicolas Rigonaux in the 1950s. It explores the organization’s facilitation of social, economic, and political multiracial projects, mainly in Dakar but also throughout FWA and FEA. An infrastructure of people, monetary resources, and print and radio platforms cohered métis people across French Africa. Racialized and gendered ideas and practices related to childhood, parenting, fostering, and family were key features in articulating the meanings of belonging, autonomy, and citizenship in 1950s French Africa. This basis led to an unstable French colonial power. Rigonaux forwarded himself as a father figure, guiding the well-being of métis and facilitating the French colonial state to fulfil its promise of equality. He succeeded in many of his initiatives with money from the colonial state. Changes he initiated were the direct remittance of welfare payments to African mothers, the publication of a newsletter, and founding a home for métis children in Dakar managed by a métis-owned charity.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207