Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les auteurs tracent un profil critique du projet Opération Renouveau (OR) et de la documentation qui s’y rapporte. Ce profil se résume à ceci. OR est un projet empirique mis en place à la hâte pour faire face à une situation d’urgence. Au cours du premier plan quinquennal, le projet a évolué considérablement sur le plan quantitatif mais très peu sur le plan qualitatif. La critique qui a été très vive tout au long du premier plan a porté presque exclusivement sur des aspects socio-pédagogiques et socio-politiques. Le deuxième plan ne propose aucun changement susceptible de placer le projet sur la voie de l’innovation. Pour conclure, les auteurs signalent que les promoteurs du projet devront choisir à court ou à moyen terme entre deux options : mettre en place une infrastructure plus démocratique et surtout mieux structurée ou accepter une formule d’autogestion.
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 | 0.027 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.011 |
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".