MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038989158

Intentionnalité, point de vue et effets de discours dans les chroniques de Louis-Gilles Francoeur : suivi de, Contes orduriers -- texte dramatique

2006· other· en· W7038989158 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2006
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyRelation (database)Section (typography)Natural (archaeology)Reading (process)Discourse analysisPosition (finance)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis comprises two sections. The first proposes a discursive analysis of forty journalistic reports written by Louis-Gilles Francoeur and published in 2005 in Le Devoir daily newspaper. Its author aimed to demonstrate that Francoeur promotes a conservationist progressive view of the relation that man should maintain with its natural environment, an ideological position favouring flora and fauna's conservation as well as their wise and sustainable management. The studied texts will, at first, be placed in their socio-historical context, among the emergence of a wider discourse: the environmental discourse in the Western civilization, in Quebec and in the medias. The reports' discursive strategies shall then be explored. The second part of this thesis presents the author's own creative writing, a play intitled Contes orduriers, which can be formally and thematically linked with the critical section of the present study.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.012
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207