MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399818659 · doi:10.1515/9782760542181

Le printemps québécois

2015· book· fr· W4399818659 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pierre-André Tremblay, Michel Roché, Sabrina Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses de l'Université du Québec eBooks · 2015
Typebook
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La mobilisation étudiante de 2012 – le « Printemps érable » – a été l’un des plus importants mouvements de masse de l’histoire récente du Québec. Elle a polarisé l’ensemble de la population québécoise et suscité de vifs débats dans tous les milieux, devenant même un sujet d’actualité internationale. La vigueur de ce mouvement auquel ont participé des centaines de milliers de citoyennes et de citoyens mérite qu’on en fasse l’analyse avec un certain recul, tout en profitant encore de sa proximité dans le temps. Cet ouvrage réunit les contributions d’universitaires s’étant distingués par leurs interventions critiques sur la place publique au cours de cette période. Il ne s’agit pas d’opposer les « pour » et les « contre » de la hausse des droits de scolarité et de la mobilisation qui en a résulté, mais de proposer une lecture critique faisant appel à différentes disciplines : philosophie, sociologie, science politique, anthropologie, travail social, littérature, géographie. Aucune ligne directrice n’a été imposée aux auteurs, afin que les multiples dimensions du mouvement puissent apparaître et en révéler la richesse. Cela ne rend que plus frappante la convergence de la plupart des textes autour de l’enjeu de la démocratie.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0690.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses de l'Université du Québec eBooksSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207