L'identité culturelle et le champ de l'apparence : une situation de soi fictive et active
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les industries culturelles donnent a voir des modeles d’identifications et des pratiques corporelles qui envahissent de plus en plus le quotidien des individus. Cette insertion dans la sphere privee se fait plus souvent qu’autrement via l’appropriation d’objets de parure dont l’echo symbolique rappelle des modes d’Etre et de Paraitre legitimes par les films de fiction ou encore par les publicites ayant recours a des stars de cinema. Prendre en charge son paraitre devient ainsi une maniere de peaufiner la definition qu’un individu cherche a se donner, au cœur de son existence. The cultural industries tend to offer patterns of identification and pervasive bodily practices into one’s private life. This invasion is usually done through the appropriation of objects, more specifically of body artifacts that are symbolically echoed through modes of “being” and “appearing” commonly shown in the movie industry or in publicity starring movie stars. Being in charge of one’s own appearance becomes the core paradigm of the definition of one’s own existence.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.077 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".