La modernité en revues. Pleins feux sur un siècle de revues québécoises Modernity in journals - spotlight on a century of journals in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les revues constituent un moyen privilégié pour étudier les représentations que dresse une société d’elle-même. Ainsi, au Québec, avec le début de la querelle entre les régionalistes et les exotiques, opposant initialement L’Action française (1917) au Nigog (1918), un siècle de modernité s’ouvre pour les revues intellectuelles québécoises. Des études fouillées ont déjà enrichi notre connaissance de certaines revues-phares, de leurs réseaux et de leurs idéologies. Le colloque «La modernité en revues» veut pousser plus loin ces explorations en invitant les chercheur·e·s en littérature, humanités et sciences sociales à venir présenter leurs travaux touchant au vaste corpus des revues québécoises des cent dernières années. Nous cherchons à comprendre le rôle primordial des périodiques et de la presse dans la structuration générale de la vie intellectuelle québécoise.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.002 |
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".