Trois interprétations du post-fordisme : la technologie, le marché et les institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte tente de démêler l’écheveau que constitue le débat sur le post-fordisme, un débat qui s’inscrit dans un questionnement plus large sur l’avenir du capitalisme et qui resurgit de manière particulièrement virulente dans les périodes de Crise et de transition. Trois perspectives d’analyse du post-fordisme sont identifiées et analysées ici, chacune rattachée à une tradition précise de l’économie politique classique et, de fait, insistant sur différentes forces guides du capitalisme. Ces trois interprétations de la présente phase du capitalisme manifestent le désaccord sur la signification du post-fordisme : s’agit-il d’un dépassement du fordisme ou renvoie-t-il à la formation d’initiatives stratégiques et à un tournant historique?
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".