Aspects contractuels dans la gestion des interactions plurilingues en contexte universitaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Dans cette contribution, nous nous pencherons sur la négociation des aspects contractuels dans deux modalités d'interaction exolingue : des interactions plurilingues romanophones dans le cadre de séances de clavardage et des interactions monolingues issues de conversations informelles en espagnol langue tierce (L3). Notre objectif sera d'analyser, dans ces interactions, les négociations de sens, de forme, de l'activité, des langues de communication et des rôles des locuteurs dans une perspective plurilingue et interactionniste de l'enseignement et de l'apprentissage des langues en milieu universitaire. On fera l'hypothèse que ces activités langagières originales et innovatrices offrent un potentiel considérable pour le développement de la compétence plurilingue des apprenants, compétence que nous envisagerons non pas comme étant un atout individuel mais comme une ressource collective et partagée.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".