La sociologie de l’innovation au service d’une recherche-action. L’exemple des clubs sportifs dans les quartiers populaires français
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article s’appuie sur une recherche-action engagée avec des clubs sportifs dans les zones urbaines sensibles en France pour questionner l’utilisation de la notion d’innovation sociale par les scientifiques et les responsables associatifs. Une approche systémique de l’innovation sociale est présentée, ainsi que sa pertinence pour comprendre les réalités observées. L’article insiste sur la dynamique relationnelle de l’innovation sociale dans les clubs sportifs, notamment par l’analyse des liens entre sociologues et porteurs de l’innovation. L’appropriation ambiguë par les acteurs de l’innovation, des notions produites par les sociologues est mise en exergue. Dès lors se pose le problème de l’engagement du chercheur et de son intégration progressive dans le processus d’innovation.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".