Comment les mouvements sociaux s’imposent face aux experts. Fluidité des positions et mobilisation des émotions dans la lutte contre le sida en France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le domaine de la lutte contre le VIH-sida en France, les associations de défense des personnes séropositives font souvent office d’acteurs protestataires, critiques à l’égard des pouvoirs publics et de coproducteurs des politiques publiques, partenaires dans leur élaboration et leur mise en oeuvre. Mais ils savent aussi parfois s’imposer politiquement aux décideurs et aux experts. L’examen des interactions, à distance et en face-à-face, entre représentants associatifs, décideurs et experts à l’occasion de la préparation d’un nouveau système de surveillance de l’épidémie, montre ainsi comment les premiers cités s’appuient sur les rapports de force politiquement constitués et sur les émotions ordinaires de leurs interlocuteurs pour parvenir à leurs fins.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".