MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399025468 · doi:10.7202/1113161ar

Bagne et indigénat aux origines de la psychiatrie de Nouvelle-Calédonie (1868-1946)

2024· article· fr· W4399025468 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nathanaëlle Soler

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir d’un corpus d’écrits médicaux et législatifs, cet article retrace la fondation de la psychiatrie coloniale en Nouvelle-Calédonie à partir de 1868 jusqu’à la fin du régime de l’indigénat en 1946, pour montrer sa spécificité par rapport à l’aliénisme à portée universelle qui s’élaborait dans l’Hexagone et ses déclinaisons dans les autres colonies françaises. Il décrit comment les reconfigurations dans la situation coloniale influèrent sur la psychiatrie et favorisèrent l’invisibilisation des aliénés Kanak. La superposition des logiques sanitaires, pénales et de peuplement favorisa l’émergence d’un aliénisme de l’enfermement et de l’éloignement, visant à protéger la société coloniale d’une contagion morale, de celle des bagnards d’abord, puis de celle des travailleurs immigrés et indigènes ensuite. Ce travail de mise à la marge se déploya sur un espace, l’île Nou, où se trouvait le bagne et son hôpital, et s’appuya sur un régime juridique fondé sur les procédures d’exception permises par le contexte du régime pénal, de celui de l’indigénat et de l’épidémie de lèpre.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

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 studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicNeurology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207