Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir de la mimésis d'appropriation ouvrant sur la remise en question de l'orthodoxie canonique liée à la séparation dualiste extérieur / intérieur et métalangage / langage objet, on aboutit à une critique postmoderne métissée ouverte aux expériences discursives. Celles-ci ouvrent la critique littéraire 1) à la présence biographique qui n'est plus pulsion subjective dans le contexte savant pseudo-objectif propre à la modernité, mais métissage en prise sur l'impossibilité d'échapper à la lutte entre croyances et herméneutiques butant sur le processus victimaire et le génocide ; 2) à la post-théorie comme travail entre discours spécialisés et discours public, ce qui mène au déplacement des paradigmes en un dynamisme fondé sur la présence de la différence des tiers et sur une sémiosis ouverte ; 3) au franchissement des limites et à une interpénétration théorie / pratique, critique / création aboutissant à des textes où le plaisir se joint à la scientificité et à la possibilité de donner place à d'autres voix.
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 | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| 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".