MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7045342964

Analyses archéobotanique et archéoentomologique d'une structure datant du tournant du XIXe siècle, au site de l'îlot des Palais (CeEt-30), à Québec

2019· other· fr· W7045342964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationCultural environmentContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des analyses archéobotaniques et archéoentomologiques ont été réalisées sur des sédiments provenant d’une structure datée du tournant du XIXe siècle, retrouvée au site de l’îlot des Palais (CeEt-30), à Québec. Les macrorestes végétaux et les restes entomologiques retrouvés nous permettent d’en apprendre davantage sur les habitudes alimentaires et la vie quotidienne des habitants de Québec durant une période d’importants changements politiques, économiques et sociaux. En effet, le début du XIXe siècle est marqué par une augmentation de la population de la ville, l’arrivée d’un grand nombre d’immigrants anglophones et le développement accéléré de l’industrie navale. Nous soutenons la thèse voulant que, malgré la mise en place de nouveaux réseaux d’échanges et de nouvelles traditions culinaires, une partie des pratiques alimentaires des Canadiens français de la Basse-Ville de Québec soient restées relativement inchangées. Grâce à cette recherche, nous sommes en mesure de mieux comprendre l’influence des premières décennies du Régime britannique sur l’ancienne capitale de la Nouvelle-France ainsi que sur la vie quotidienne de ses habitants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→