MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417439919 · doi:10.4000/15dhh

À quels patrimoines immatériels culturels Noël appartient-il ?

2025· article· fr· W4417439919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olivier Bauer

Bibliographic record

VenueSociétés & Représentations · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterculturalityPublic spaceAlien

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article explore la place de Noël dans le patrimoine culturel immatériel et évalue si Noël appartient à un patrimoine chrétien ou à un patrimoine commun. Après avoir brièvement situé Noël dans les définitions de l’Unesco et en avoir succinctement rappelé quelques traditions, il présente l’histoire de Noël en termes d’évolution – le christianisme n’a pas fêté pas Noël avant le ive siècle –, d’appropriation – le christianisme a emprunté des dates, des rites et des symboles qui lui sont antérieurs et extérieurs – et d’annulation – aux xvie et xviie siècles, une fraction du protestantisme a refusé de fêter Noël et interdit de le faire. Examinant la situation contemporaine aux États-Unis, au Québec et en France, il décortique ensuite ce que l’on considère parfois comme « une guerre à Noël », mais qui correspond plutôt au désir de minimiser l’impact public de Noël pour laisser de la place à d’autres expressions religieuses, spirituelles ou philosophiques. Il conclut en montrant les risques que prendraient la société comme le christianisme à réduire Noël à un patrimoine purement chrétien ou seulement séculier et les avantages à le reconnaître comme un patrimoine commun.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.019
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.412 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociétés & ReprésentationsSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207