Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le nom de Neil Fligstein est associe a la nouvelle sociologie economique nord-americaine, du fait de ses objets de recherche et de son attention pour l’encastrement social des phenomenes economiques. Pourtant, il se distingue des travaux de Mark Granovetter en insistant sur les fonctions de l’Etat dans la construction des marches, dans une posture dont s’inspire en France Pierre Bourdieu dans Les Structures sociales de l’economie. Ainsi, c’est dans les Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales que cet article(1) a ete traduit par son collegue a l’universite de Berkeley, Loic Wacquant. Son dernier ouvrage(2) porte sur la theorie des champs ; il y insiste sur le fait que le concept de champ n’est pas specifique a la seule sociologie bourdieusienne mais permet de retraduire un certain nombre de resultats de la sociologie des organisations, de l’economie institutionnaliste et des sciences politiques, et pourrait s’averer une theorie generale pour aborder le niveau mesosocial (3).(1)Article paru sous le titre « Le mythe du marche » de Neil Fligstein, © Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, n° 139 [ « L’exception americaine » (2)], septembre 2001, p. 3-12.(2) N. Fligstein et D. McAdam, A Theory of Fields, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012.(3) www.mcgill.ca/msr/volume1/interview.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".