Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'archéologie est depuis vingt ans le lieu d'un programme de recherches consacrées à une analyse formelle des constructions historiques, inspirée du paradigme computationnel. Les travaux menés dans cette voie apportent quelque lumière sur des questions d'épistémologie pratique, groupées ici sous trois titres: le sens et la place du " naturel " dans ces constructions (langage naturel, logique naturelle, raisonnement naturel) ; la manière dont on s'y accommode ou non de la pluralité des interprétations et de leur caractère réputé non cumulatif ; la viabilité des positions médianes recommandées aujourd'hui entre science et littérature ou sens commun. L'article expose les enseignements tirés du programme logiciste sur ces différents points, en archéologie, et s'achève par une interrogation sur leur pertinence dans les sciences sociales en général.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".