MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417237422 · doi:10.1515/9782766307678

Histoire intellectuelle de femmes libérales au Québec, 1830-1920

2025· book· W4417237422 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yvan Lamonde

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily relationshipHappeningFamily life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Québec, les femmes ne furent guère présentes dans le mouvement de décollage culturel et intellectuel des années 1840. On recense en effet peu de femmes dans la presse, dans les associations comme l’Institut canadien de Montréal ou le Cabinet de lecture paroissial, sinon dans l’auditoire. Elles ont eu leur propre dynamique culturelle et intellectuelle trente ou quarante ans plus tard, le plus souvent dans les mêmes formes et médias que ceux des hommes en 1840. Depuis cinquante ans, leur histoire s’est beaucoup faite en vase clos : littéraire, civique, politique. Les « premières » de cette histoire ont souvent été magnifiées. L’objectif du présent ouvrage est de dérouler les conditions de possibilité de la contribution de femmes à l’histoire intellectuelle du Québec, de décrire, de dater et de sérier les moyens qui ont successivement rendu possibles leurs avancées. Insérer les femmes dans l’histoire intellectuelle – les Papineau, Dessaulles, Marchand –, c’est établir leur place dans l’histoire de l’alphabétisation et de la scolarisation, saisir la signification exceptionnelle de leur usage du journal intime ou personnel, constater qu’elles ont dû, elles aussi, faire face à la confessionnalisation. Ce faisant, on verra par quelles étapes et à quel moment s’est construite leur insertion dans la discussion intellectuelle publique.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→