Perspectives de recherche et d’action pour la valorisation scientifique : sur quelques expériences hypermédias en archéologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La communication des savoirs scientifiques est un élément essentiel de la science, participant de son ampleur et de ses justifications politiques et sociales. Centrée sur le champ de l’archéologie, la réflexion se focalise ici sur la valorisation hypermedia entendue comme processus de mise en valeur par les techniques digitales des savoirs scientifiques à destination de publics nonspécialistes. Quatre expériences de conception et réalisation d’hypermédias de valorisation du patrimoine archéologique servent de socles pour explorer différentes perspectives : complexité endogène des hypermedias, professionnalisation du médiateur hypermedia, transversalité des dispositifs, complexité exogène. Nous proposons que cette conjonction de perspectives aide à mieux comprendre comment sont définies de nouvelles conditions de recherche et d’action pour la valorisation scientifique. Nous voulons aussi montrer concrètement comment les techniques digitales participent à l’avancée de la science et à la démocratisation des connaissances par le biais d’outils de médiation.
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 | 0.030 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.080 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.033 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".