Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis l'arrivée des nouveaux antidépresseurs, la possibilité d'une " psychopharmacologie cosmétique " est fréquemment évoquée et soulève plusieurs questions morales. Cet article esquisse un bilan critique de changements engendrés depuis cinquante ans par les médicaments psychotropes : la domestication de la folie via le contrôle à distance du fou, la pseudo-biologisation de la pensée et de la pratique psychiatriques et l'augmentation phénoménale des indications pour la prise régulière de psychotropes via la multiplication des catégories diagnostiques et leur compartimentation. Les récits personnels de guérison chimique se substituent aux évaluations d'efficacité thérapeutique, laquelle pâlit néanmoins en comparaison de l'insaisissable effet placebo. Dans un contexte d'augmentation de la détresse psychologique, le médicament psychotrope servirait de carburant à une entreprise de nivellement moral où l'égalité réside dans la pathologie et dans son traitement.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".