Le « populisme » au Québec : approches lexicographiques et discursives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cette contribution nous nous proposons d’explorer les différentes stratégies discursives mises en œuvre par les journalistes afin de définir le populisme au Québec. Phénomène connu depuis longtemps, le populisme a fait l’objet de nombreuses recherches et débats. Mais qu’en est-il au Québec ? Après avoir présenté rapidement les contextes socio-historique, socio-politique et socio-culturel québécois, nous allons suivre d’abord la façon dont le concept évolue sur le plan lexicographique et ensuite sur le plan discursif. De façon plus spécifique, à partir d’un corpus tiré du quotidien québécois Le Devoir, nous nous proposons de faire ressortir les modalités discursives à travers lesquelles les journalistes co-construisent une/des représentations du populisme au Québec.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".