Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les nouveaux paramètres de l’anthropologie contemporaine tendent à rendre la frontière entre les notions de « proche » et de « lointain » de plus en plus floues. Basé sur un terrain de recherche mené auprès de couples mixtes au Maroc, ce texte propose une réflexion sur la mouvance de cette frontière et plus précisément sur trois aspects liés à la particularité de ma recherche doctorale : mon statut de chercheure-immigrante qui brouille les frontières classiques de l’anthropologie en faisant de mon terrain, mené en terre exotique, un second chez moi ; mon choix méthodologique, celui de placer l’expérience partagée au coeur de ma recherche, puisqu’il amène un questionnement sur ma posture de chercheure ; et finalement la production d’une connaissance scientifique sur un sujet dans lequel on est personnellement engagé. Cette proximité avec mon sujet de recherche soulève une réflexion sur les notions d’engagement et de distanciation, mais également sur la part de biographie présente dans l’élaboration d’une théorie.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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".