MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131385219 · doi:10.7202/1123552ar

<i>Tchi-Tchi</i> , <i>Coeur de maman</i> et <i>I’ll Sing You a Thousand Love Songs</i>  : collections de partitions et goûts élitaires en chanson au Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, 1920-1950

2025· article· fr· W7131385219 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
François Guérard

Bibliographic record

VenueMens Revue d histoire intellectuelle et culturelle · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationMusicalOrder (exchange)Chinese literature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La sensibilité de la population québécoise aux nouveautés culturelles véhiculées par les médias durant la première moitié du xx e siècle a fait l’objet de divers travaux. La présente étude s’inscrit dans leur prolongement en cherchant à préciser les choix alors effectués, dans le domaine de la chanson, au sein de groupes élitaires de la société régionale du Saguenay – Lac-Saint-Jean. À l’aide d’enquêtes par sondages, une sociologie du goût musical s’est développée reposant sur la caractérisation des préférences des groupes sociaux, une voie toutefois impraticable en histoire. À cet égard, les collections de partitions versées aux archives offrent une piste documentaire qui est explorée ici. Leur exploitation révèle un éventail de choix plus étendu que ce que semble indiquer l’historiographie socioculturelle des élites canadiennes-françaises, incluant une ouverture à la chanson populaire américaine. L’amplitude de cet éventail manifeste un éclectisme qui, à une autre échelle, anticipe sur la temporalité généralement admise des transformations du goût musical chez les élites occidentales.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMens Revue d histoire intellectuelle et culturelleSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207