La production statistique d’un intervenant social : une configuration sociocognitive improbable ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article présente l’initiative d’un nouveau type d’« entrepreneur » de production de connaissances à des fins de discussion, d’une part sur les formes de connaissances nécessaires pour l’intervention sociale et d’autre part sur la division classique du travail de production de savoirs dans le domaine social. La thèse consiste à défendre la possibilité d’un développement collectif ou collaboratif des connaissances du monde social qui peut émerger d’une part de formes de gouvernances qui ne dépendent ni de l’État ou de ses administrations ni des organismes institutionnels et d’autre part du développement des outils géomatiques. Le cas présenté ici est celui d’un intervenant social communautaire qui est aussi sociologue de formation. Son récit et sa réflexion, qu’il a menée avec sa collaboratrice, servent en fin de compte à poser les termes du débat sur les modes à la fois cognitif et social de production des connaissances du monde.
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".