Penser la francophonie canadienne au prisme de la résilience, de la résistance et des alliances Thinking French-speaking Canada through the optic of resilience, resistance and alliances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’Association des universités de la francophonie canadienne (AUFC) et le Réseau de la recherche sur la francophonie canadienne (RRF) organisent, dans le cadre du 82e Congrès de l’ACFAS, un colloque multidisciplinaire réunissant chercheurs et étudiants universitaires, ainsi qu’intervenants communautaires et gouvernementaux, dans une visée de réflexion et de dialogue. L'événement propose de porter un regard neuf sur la francophonie canadienne d’hier et d’aujourd’hui au prisme des notions de résistance, de résilience et d'alliances. Plus exactement, il s'agit de voir, d'une part, comment ces notions peuvent nous amener à mieux comprendre les capacités d'habilitation, de responsabilisation et d'autodétermination des francophonies minoritaires aujourd'hui et, d'autre part, comment elles peuvent nous permettre d'éclairer leur passé et cerner la spécificité de leur expérience historique.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.003 |
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".