La physique nucléaire, d’une discipline atomisée à une organisation consolidée (1945-2000)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le 2 novembre 1945, l’ordonnance réorganisant le CNRS est promulguée. Le Centre se voit confier comme mission « de développer, orienter et coordonner les recherches scientifiques de tous ordres ». À cette période, la situation de la physique nucléaire française est catastrophique : physiciens isolés des recherches internationales et coupés de certains collègues qui se sont réfugiés durant l’été 1940 en Grande-Bretagne puis au Canada, matériel désuet ou endommagé durant les bombardements, et surtout dislocation d’un groupe en plein développement à la veille du second conflit mondial. La question que nous posons est alors simple : comment les organismes d’État responsables de la physique nucléaire, notamment le CNRS et l’Université, ont-ils réussi à doter la France d’une communauté de chercheurs dans cette discipline aujourd’hui mondialement reconnue ?
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".