Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interventions, 1961-2001. Science sociale & action politique, Pierre Bourdieu. Textes choisis par Franck Poupeau et Thierry Discepolo, Collection “ Contre-feux ”, Marseille et Montréal : Lux Éditions, Agone, Comeau et Nadeau, 2002, 487 p. “ J'ai toujours pour principe de dire ce qu'il y a de plus difficile à avaler pour le public auquel je parle - ce qui est le contraire de la démagogie. ” (Bourdieu, 2002 [1989] : 74). Cette devise véhémente résume éloquemment l'esprit de cet ouvrage colossal de plus de 80 entretiens, conférences et articles, rapports et documents d'archives, tous écrits (ou quelquefois co-rédigés) par le sociologue Pierre Bourdieu (1930-2002). La plupart de ces textes étaient initialement parus dans diverses revues, françaises ou étrangères (et même au Japon), et à l'occasion dans Les Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, revue dont Bourdieu a été le fondateur en 1975. Or, presque aucun de ces textes choisis n'était jusqu'ici disponible sous forme de livre, ce qui rendra son contenu pratiquement inédit.
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 | 0.022 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 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".