MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402640239 · doi:10.7202/1113394ar

Faire nation par la mine ? Histoire politique des territoires miniers au Groenland

2023· article· fr· W4402640239 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pia Bailleul

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Groenland est engagé dans un extractivisme d’État pour soutenir la stratégie d’accession à l’indépendance par la rente minière. Après une décennie de conflit, une forme d’union nationale, allant du gouvernement à la population, émerge autour de mines éloignées des localités ou de mines de petites tailles de proximité. Comment comprendre le retour de ce modèle, blâmé dans les années 1980 et historiquement vecteur d’un phénomène d’enclave critiqué dans l’histoire du Groenland ? Se distanciant des approchesNot in my backyardet politistes, qui abordent cette question sous l’angle des compromis minier pour l’indépendance, je propose de la saisir dans une perspective historique des enjeux politiques et sociaux du minier. L’article s’appuie sur des données ethnographiques et bibliographiques pour dresser une histoire duminescapegroenlandais, autrement dit des mondes sociaux et des questions politiques émergeant des pratiques minières. Il met ainsi au jour une association entre le minier et le nationalisme dans la représentation et l’identification d’une territoire politique, et analyse l’extractivisme contemporain et ses modèles d’extraction comme un renouvellement de l’imaginaire national du territoire.

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)0.001
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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/StudiesSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207