Revues.org : l’invention de l’édition électronique scientifique, entre libre accès et modèle économique pérenne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Libre accès à la littérature scientifique, appropriation par la communauté des chercheurs et des revues, logique de diffusion et de référencement web : les principes fondateurs de Revues.org, portail de revues de sciences humaines et sociales créé en 1999 en marge des institutions d’enseignement supérieur et de recherche françaises, sont aussi ce qui le distingue dans le paysage de l’édition électronique scientifique. Cet article dresse un historique de cette association devenue laboratoire, en mettant au jour les enjeux qui ont jalonné et continuent d’orienter son parcours : définition de l’édition électronique et de ses métiers, modalités de l’appropriation des plateformes par leurs utilisateurs, développement de nouveaux outils aux services des chercheurs, invention d’un modèle économique pour les revues et pour le portail.
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 | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.012 |
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".