MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090038125 · doi:10.7202/1016745ar

Ce que la FNAC a fait du livre. Innovations, controverses et rationalisation dans le commerce culturel français

2013· article· fr· W2090038125 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vincent Chabault

Bibliographic record

VenueMémoires du livre · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesRationalisationPolitical scienceArtMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contrairement à la lecture ou à la trajectoire de maisons d’édition, la question de la médiation marchande du livre a été peu traitée par les recherches de sciences sociales menées sur le livre. Mobilisant une approche classique de la sociologie de la consommation, qui s’intéresse aux structures commerciales pour la culture marchande qu’elles contribuent à façonner, cet article examine les conditions d’achat que la FNAC a aménagées pour le livre et leurs effets du côté des clients et du côté des professionnels du secteur. Trois éléments sont mis en évidence : les innovations apportées par « l’agitateur culturel » dans la médiation du livre à son lecteur-consommateur, les controverses que son engagement a suscitées, ainsi que les effets provoqués par les stratégies de rationalisation mises au point pour sélectionner l’offre et approvisionner ses points de vente.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMémoires du livreSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207