Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article vise à explorer et questionner les modèles de justice restauratrice et, pour ce faire, à les analyser en recourant au modèle de socialité vindicatoire. Ce modèle est vu ici à titre heuristique, comme un modèle de régulation actif dans les rapports sociaux, uniquement perceptible au niveau de l'action et adapté aux caractéristiques d'une société étatisée, centralisée et organique. Procéder à une telle analyse aide à faire ressortir et à réaffirmer certaines valeurs fondamentales de l'approche restauratrice, valeurs qui, selon plusieurs études empiriques, sont quelquefois édulcorées ou passées sous silence lors de leur mise en application. Poser un regard différent sur l'approche restauratrice et en faire ressortir les facettes vindicatoires conduit au final à interroger la place occupée par la justice restauratrice dans les modes de régulation contemporains.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".