Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comment l’expérience de la psychanalyse peut-elle rendre compte de ce qui fait la relation vivante de chacun à l’étrangeté de « sa » langue, en particulier quand celle-ci porte des parts d’indicible, de douleur innommable, de catastrophe subjective irreprésentable, hors de toute mémoire et de tout souvenir ? La confiance faite à l’autre est ici décisive, et constitue tout l’enjeu de l’analyse permanente des contre-transferts mobilisés en séance. En quoi la dominance actuelle d’une langue de la technique, réduite à son savoir-faire, en vient à disqualifier la fonction identifiante de la parole, au risque d’ouvrir à cette part refoulée de la langue qu’on pourrait désigner comme « post-totalitaire » ? Il s’agira ici de repérer ce qui, dans la clinique de la séance, renvoie à un tel drame de la langue, dans la destitution transmise de son pouvoir de nomination.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".