Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lorsqu’il s’agit de parler de rencontres des cultures, le terme « interculturel » semble approprié. Pourtant, si de nombreux travaux traitent de ce concept, l’absence des anthropologues y est notable. Paradoxalement, l’interculturalité est au coeur de la discipline ; omniprésente, mais exprimée en d’autres termes. La théorie des mythes modèles de Gananath Obeyesekere est ici appliquée aux cas des expatriés occidentaux en Inde, afin de mettre à contribution les travaux des anthropologues et d’enrichir la réflexion sur l’interculturalité. À travers l’étude de l’appropriation et de la transformation des mythes du renonçant, du bienfaiteur et du hippie, la théorie des mythes modèles permet de s’approprier l’interculturalité comme objet d’étude tout en préservant la richesse de l’analyse anthropologique. La rencontre culturelle est ainsi théorisée de façon à permettre de s’éloigner des théories par étapes courantes, d’étudier l’interculturel dans son contexte et dans toute sa complexité, en tenant compte de ce qui entoure et précède imaginairement et historiquement la rencontre.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".