Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente quelques expériences personnelles de terrain en le situant dans un cadre théorique et conceptuel qui questionne les transformations de l’anthropologie. La première partie discute de l’avenir de l’anthropologie et de la pertinence du terrain dans une discipline de plus en plus axée sur les études non-traditionnelles. La deuxième partie présente quelques expériences de terrain en milieu amérindien et métis en mettant l’accent sur les silences de l’ethnographie, sur les ratés de la relation dialogique qui ont transformé mes rôles, mon statut et mon identité. La question de discipline dans ses différentes acceptions : branche de la connaissance, direction morale, règle de conduite et obéissance à l’autorité, discipline de notre culture, de notre éducation, de nos pairs et de nos hôtes, et celle que nous leur imposons parfois malgré nous, est le fil conducteur de cet article qui discute en troisième partie de l’importance du concept d’ontologie dans les rencontres interculturelles.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".