MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061943294 · doi:10.7202/1029262ar

La pertinence de Hall pour l’étude de l’intersectionnalité1

2015· article· fr· W2061943294 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sirma Bilge

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La recherche intersectionnelle expose avec force les limites des approches additives et multiplicatives pour appréhender l’architecture complexe du pouvoir. Cependant, au chapitre de la théorisation des liens entre divers éléments formant cette architecture, la réflexion gagnerait à être poursuivie et complexifiée. À cette fin, l’article mobilise l’oeuvre de Stuart Hall et identifie et discute deux voies fécondes pour l’approfondissement et le renouvellement des problématiques théoriques intersectionnelles. Il propose : 1. de combiner la théorie hallienne de l’articulation entre différentes instances (économique / juridico-politique / idéologique) à la prémisse intersectionnelle de co-constitution de différents opérateurs de pouvoir (race / classe / genre) pour une théorisation plus complexe du pouvoir; et 2. de s’inspirer de la théorisation hallienne de la conjoncture pour éviter l’écueil d’une intersectionnalité à application universelle et saisir les conditions géohistoriques spécifiques sous lesquelles articulations (économique / juridico-politique / idéologique) et intersections (race / classe / genre) se forment et forment une unité complexe différenciée, une « structure articulée à dominante », quoique contingente.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207