Le système interactionnel : connexions sémantiques et contextique relationnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si la systémique permet de mettre en exergue la complexité des interactions humaines (Meunier 2003), elle a aussi pour but d’en préciser les modalités de régulations et les éléments permettant à ces interactions d’émerger et de se maintenir (Varela et al. 1993). En reliant cette systémique interactionnelle à des principes hérités du connexionnisme (Bechtel et Abrahamsen 1993, Marcus 2001), nous affirmons qu’il devient alors possible de mettre l’accent sur l’importance du contexte dans les interactions et sur la manière dont les individus réagissent en fonction de noeuds sémantiques, dans la mesure où ces noeuds se retrouvent notamment activés lors de processus d’identification nécessaires pour l’individu ou le groupe (Burke et Stets 2009). Le présent travail théorique explore ces possibilités, en lien avec la prise en compte de la complexité des relations humaines (Lerbet-Séréni 1994, Wagener 2010).
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".