MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159075995 · doi:10.7202/1007084ar

Une nouvelle logique de l’interdisciplinarité

2011· article· fr· W2159075995 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles perspectives en sciences sociales · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une épistémologie non-standard, relativement autonome des disciplines et du présent, est nécessaire pour caractériser une nouvelle logique de l’interdisciplinarité. Il s’agira de montrer comment la crise de la représentation des sciences, la modification des objets scientifiques contemporains, l’hétérogénéité et l’incompatibilité des modèles – un autre rapport au futur dans les sciences – nous conduit à pratiquer une « interdiscipline » qui ne peut plus être caractérisée comme la combinaison de connaissances disciplinaires différentes. Nous montrerons comment construire dans cette hétérogénéité des « lieux d’interdiscipline » qui permettent de nouvelles relations entre les disciplines, ainsi que des relations démocratiques entre disciplines. Cela suppose une translation ou une dérive des disciplines et une conception des objets comme « inconnus » et non représentables dans une « distance phénoménologique ».

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it