Charles Soulié, ed., Un mythe à détruire? Origines et destin du Centre universitaire expérimental de Vincennes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on a rich variety of sources (including statistics, interviews, archives, original printed documents, and recollections), Un mythe à détruire?offers a stimulating historical and sociological account of the tumultuous establishment of Vincennes University in the aftermath of France's May 1968.At a time when the history of European and North American universities is being revisited by a new generation of scholars, this edited book may well stand as a model to follow because of its capacity to present a portrait of the Parisian institution that brings to life the numerous polemics and crises Vincennes had to go through, without ever succumbing to a partisan or egocentric approach.Sorbonne and Vincennes are probably the two French universities about which the most literature has been written.Yet the greater part of this literature consists of opinionated essays that resort to bold statements instead of meticulous empirical descriptions.Un mythe à détruire?stands in sharp contrast to these lyric endeavours.In so doing, the book's contributors (
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".