MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382655386 · doi:10.3138/chr-2022-0022

« Pour les mettre en état de gagner leur vie » : propriété, stratégies familiales et rapport à l’avenir au tournant du XX<sup>e </sup>siècle en Mauricie (Québec)

2023· article· fr· W4382655386 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Thierry Nootens

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article exploite des documents judiciaires particuliers – des demandes d’autorisation à vendre les biens d’enfants mineurs – afin de contribuer à l’étude des stratégies familiales durant la transition au capitalisme industriel au Québec. Ces sources sont surtout précieuses en ce qu’elles permettent de saisir sur le vif des moments charnières des trajectoires familiales, moments marqués simultanément par des difficultés économiques profondes et la recherche d’un nouvel avenir pour la famille. Trois objectifs ont guidé l’analyse : documenter les formes de précarité vécue par les petits propriétaires urbains et ruraux durant les années 1880–1930; mettre en évidence les rapports familiaux et communautaires ayant marqué le parcours de ces ménages; inscrire les résultats obtenus dans l’histoire des sociétés propriétaristes d’avant la grande cassure des années 1930. Nous verrons que c’est également au cœur de la vie privée et de ses aléas que se reproduisaient de profondes (et brutales) inégalités sociales au tournant du XXe siècle, aux côtés du marché du travail et de l’exploitation capitaliste de la force de travail.

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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

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 studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207