Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Les progrès des techniques informatiques (mise au point de la norme Unicode qui permet de mettre à disposition du créateur de code graphique n’importe quel signe) rendent paradoxalement plus nécessaire encore la distinction entre deux stades de la réflexion et de l’action dans la mise au point de codes graphiques pour les langues qui n’en possèdent pas. On propose donc ici de distinguer la “graphiation”, qui inclut toutes les formes d’approches de la problématique de l’écriture de ces langues (qu’il s’agisse de considérations sociales, économiques, psychologiques ou, bien entendu, linguistiques) d’un stade de réflexion et d’intervention ultérieur, la “graphisation” qui inclut, elle, les solutions techniques qui se dégagent des conclusions de la réflexion antérieure. En somme et en simplifiant beaucoup, il faut se demander “pour quoi ?” on écrit une langue avant de décider “comment” on choisit de le faire.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".