Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having become central in the sociology of art and music, the concepts of mediation and mediators have received little echo in the literary field. Despite the opening of some theorists of social criticism (Duchet, Cros, Viala), these notions have had a long dormant among both sociologists — literature outside their attention to the institutional mediations (price, academies, salons) — that among researchers — rather concerned about the trends of the “social” or “discourse” in that they weigh about literature. Tis communication will take advantage of the rapprochement between social criticism and related approaches (discourse analysis, sociology of literature, study of myths and postures copyright, cultural history, etc..) and thus questioning the joints between individual and the collective in the literary field. It will aim to better understand conceptually mediations and placed in the center of an enterprise of triangulation between text, discursive configurations and settings socio-historical. Trough the mediation of speech review, institutions or the social imaginary, will be outlined a research program whose ultimate goal is to reintegrate social criticism in an interdisciplinary perspective.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.081 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".