De l’art de ritualiser en contexte pandémique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude examine les stratégies rituelles adoptées par les personnes endeuillées pour vivre leur deuil en dépit des restrictions sanitaires liées à la pandémie de la COVID-19. En s’appuyant sur une méthodologie qualitative, l’étude analyse de façon thématique les données de 84 entretiens semi-dirigés réalisés auprès de 57 participants résidant au Canada. Les résultats révèlent une adaptation créative des rituels funéraires, marquée par une transgression partielle des normes sanitaires et le recours à des formes artistiques variées, permettant d’honorer leurs défunts et de canaliser leurs émotions. La privation de rituels traditionnels a exacerbé un sentiment d'isolement, renforçant le besoin fondamental des endeuillés de se rassembler. Cette recherche met en lumière l’importance de garantir un accès à des rituels adaptés, même en période de crise, pour prévenir les perturbations du processus de deuil.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".