Regard anthropologique sur l’alimentation des tout-petits de 0-2 ans au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude procède à une exploration critique des pratiques alimentaires québécoises contemporaines de parents eu égard à l’alimentation de leurs enfants de 0 à 2 ans. Les perspectives de 40 parents et de 13 personnes-ressources de l’alimentation des tout-petits ont été colligées lors d’entretiens semi-dirigés dont le contenu a été analysé. Ces personnes étaient basées dans la région de la Capitale-Nationale (Québec, Canada). Six styles de réactions face aux recommandations en matière d’alimentation des tout-petits ont été identifiées chez les parents : la conformité face aux avis experts; l’acceptation de la guidance basée sur ces avis; les recherches personnelles menant à l’adhésion aux recommandations officielles ou à la confiance en des sources alternatives; l’appartenance à un courant d’inspiration alimentaire précis; la dissidence et le désintérêt. Les parents possèdent une agency, une capacité d’agir et de faire des choix menant à des pratiques parfois normatives, parfois hétérodoxes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".