Nouveaux regards sur les métiers de la sécurité. Introduction au numéro thématique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pour montrer la richesse et la variete des metiers de la securite d'aujourd'hui, il convient de rapidement les situer a l'arriere-plan des mutations du monde contemporain. Ils emergent dans le creuset d'un nouveau referentiel dominant, celui de la securite globale , ou plus exactement, au sein d'un processus evolutif de securisation du monde tel qu'il a ete theorise par l'Ecole de Copenhague (Buzan et al., 1998). On assiste a un phenomene inedit de dilatation du champ de la securite ou se cristallisent quatre processus dynamiques en interdependance : un processus ontologique ou se reformulent des idees securitaires sur le monde et correlativement, des processus strategiques et sociologiques par lesquels des acteurs revendiquent une expertise specifique originale ; des processus bureaucratiques laissant apparaitre des institutions investies d'autorites et de competences nouvelles ; des processus technologiques marques par une nette inflexion et emprise de technologies dediees a des objectifs securitaires inedits. Et tous ces processus ont des implications reelles sur le remodelage des metiers de la securite.
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 | 0.027 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".