Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article discute de l'interactivité sous trois éclairages de nature différente. Dans une première partie, l'auteur tente de renouveler la définition de l'interactivité dans ses rapports à la simulation de la présence humaine. Une deuxième partie s'attache aux enjeux éducatifs propres à l'interactivité, cherchant à montrer pourquoi et comment devrait s'imposer un objectif central consistant à favoriser, entre autres, le « devenir auteur » des générations montantes. La troisième partie porte sur le récit interactif. L'auteur fait apparaître qu'à travers les questions de la séquentialité du récit, des temporalités de sa réception, de la présence de l'interlecteur dans la narration ou de l'irruption d'un tiers le programme dans la relation auteur/lecteur, ce sont toujours des théories fictionnelles de la vie qui se tiennent en arrière-plan.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".