Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé: L’article s’interroge sur l’absence, en Suisse, d’un mouvement national interne qui s’opposerait au récit national fédéral. L’auto‐désignation comme nation, au sein de pays plurilingues comme le Canada, est l’indice de tensions linguistiques fortes, mais en Suisse, seul le concept de « communauté linguistique » se réfère à l’échelon ethnolinguistique. Même si les émotions identitaires et le rapport au territoire dans le canton de Fribourg rappellent la situation québécoise, les conflits linguistiques sont réglés exclusivement au niveau cantonal. Pour qu’émerge un discours national « infra‐suisse », il faudrait que l’appartenance romande ou alémanique soit considérée comme particulièrement centrale. Or, notre enquête auprès de 962 conseillers communaux de cantons bilingues montre que l’affiliation linguistique est importante et modèle les comportements politiques, mais qu’elle ne concurrence pas l’identification cantonale (particulièrement forte en Valais) ou l’identification suisse. Pour des raisons qui tiennent à l’histoire et à la géographie linguistique, la Suisse demeure une nation unitaire.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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".