Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette etude comparative cherche a eclairer l’expansion et le declin du mouvement syndicaliste revolutionnaire au tournant du XX e siecle, et puis a analyser les similarites et les differences de ce courant du mouvement ouvrier international. Il s’agit d’une dizaine de pays occidentaux bien inspires de l’esprit syndicaliste. A l’exception des Francais, les syndicalistes revolutionnaires representent invariablement des mouvements minoritaires. La masse constituee par l’ensemble des syndicalistes revolutionnaires parait bien faible par rapport a leurs concurrents reformistes ou socio-democrates. La CGT francais offre un exemple phare du syndicalisme revolutionnaire au niveau international. Le declin du syndicalisme revolutionnaire ne tient pas seulement a des conditions conjoncturelles comme la repression aggressive par les pouvoirs publics, mais aussi a des changements structurels du regime capitaliste. Les familles syndicalistes renferment non seulement des ressemblances, mais aussi des dissemblances, qui trouve leurs sources dans des contextes nationaux tres divers. Il existe un ensemble de valeurs partagees, percues par tous les mouvements syndicalistes: le mecontentement a l’egard des partis de gauche et des syndicats reformistes, la primaute et l’autonomie des organisations ouvrieres, l’action directe(greve generale). Mais les divergences importantes portent sur l’esprit revolutionnaire, les strategies organisationnelles, la composition sociale des ouvriers a syndiquer, etc. A premiere vue, la ligne de demarcation se place entre les anciens pays deja industrialises avec la tradition du mouvement ouvrier bien developpe (Angleterre, France, Italie, etc.) et les pays recemment industrialises apres 1870(Etats-unis, Canada, Allemagne, etc.).
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.082 | 0.019 |
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".