Excaver, tracer, réécrire : sur les renouveaux historiques en communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article rend compte de deux nouvelles perspectives en histoire de la communication : la nouvelle histoire des études en communication et les histoires sociales et médio-archéologiques des médias. Nous présenterons d’abord les contextes d’émergence ainsi que les contributions propres à ces deux renouveaux historiques, pour ensuite tenter de les articuler en examinant leurs contributions et leurs limites. Ce faisant, nous souhaitons contribuer à ce numéro thématique de trois façons, soit 1) en offrant un aperçu critique de perspectives qui ont récemment redynamisé la recherche en communication ; 2) en problématisant certains des enjeux inhérents à la pratique de l’histoire ; et 3) en esquissant quelques-unes des lignes de convergence pouvant solidariser l’histoire de la communication et l’histoire des médias.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".