Bibliographic record
Abstract
À l’appui de l’analyse du conflit social des intermittents du spectacle en France traversé par des crises récurrentes depuis le début des années 1980, cet article se propose d’interroger les processus de construction d’un acteur collectif hétérogène ainsi que la continuité de l’engagement de salariés caractérisés par la discontinuité de l’emploi. L’analyse vise, d’une part, à comprendre l’émergence des coordinations et des autres collectifs de lutte dans ce mouvement et, d’autre part, à caractériser le rapport entretenu entre l’individu et le collectif. La prise en compte de l’expérience individuelle des acteurs engagés permet de révéler combien l’idéal politique défendu et le sens de l’engagement dans ces collectifs sont profondément rattachés à l’ethos artistique propre aux mondes de l’art. Bien loin de se substituer aux organisations syndicales, les collectifs deviennent des lieux de réaffirmation identitaire pour des salariés en quête de certitudes identitaires.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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 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".