MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409082216 · doi:10.1017/ahss.2025.2

Sous le radar colonial ?

2024· article· fr· W4409082216 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adrian Muckle, Benoît Trépied

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales Histoire Sciences Sociales · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismRadarHistoryGeographyComputer scienceArchaeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les recherches sur les intimités interraciales en contexte colonial s’intéressent généralement à des cas de litiges administratifs ou de conflits judiciaires qui ont attiré l’attention des autorités coloniales vis-à-vis de certains « couples mixtes », « familles multiraciales » et autres individus « métis ». Mais qu’en est-il de la vie et de l’expérience de celles et ceux qui n’ont pas contesté leur statut légal et sont restés sous le « radar administratif », demeurant ainsi virtuellement invisibles dans les archives de l’État colonial ? Cet article aborde ces questions dans le cadre de la colonie française de Nouvelle-Calédonie, en analysant la trajectoire d’un foyer familial établi à l’abri des regards officiels, composé d’un colon français, d’une femme autochtone kanak et de leurs descendants. L’objectif est ici de comprendre ce que ce phénomène de relative invisibilité sociale révèle de la portée et des limites de la domination coloniale « au ras du sol ». Croisant enquête ethnographique de terrain et recherche en archives, l’article retrace les conditions dans lesquelles cette configuration familiale a pu émerger puis se maintenir pendant plus de cinquante ans. Elle a finalement disparu après la mort du colon français, lorsque chacun des deux groupes familiaux élargis – du côté européen et du côté kanak – a œuvré, à des degrés divers, à l’effacement de ce passé gênant au sein de leurs mondes sociaux respectifs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueAnnales Histoire Sciences SocialesSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207