Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche qualitative conduite auprès de 14 hommes des Premières Nations ayant séjourné dans un pavillon de ressourcement au Canada (Waseskun au Québec, Pê Sâkâstêw et Stan Daniels en Alberta, ou Kwìkwèxwelhp en Colombie-Britannique). L’approche phénoménologique a permis d’explorer la perception de ces hommes quant à leur démarche de guérison et de déterminer les éléments qui favorisent ou entravent ce processus. Les résultats mettent en évidence l’importance des dimensions individuelles, relationnelles, culturelles et spirituelles dans leur démarche de guérison, de même que les contraintes liées à la guérison institutionnelle prescrite et les enjeux ayant trait à la conception panindianiste de la guérison au sein des structures institutionnelles. Enfin, cette recherche invite à poursuivre les réflexions autour de la flexibilité institutionnelle, de la nécessité d’une offre diversifiée de cheminements possibles et de la place renouvelée que pourraient prendre les pavillons de ressourcement dans l’univers correctionnel, et au-delà.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".