Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMO: O presente texto se propõe a discutir as dimensões do lazer popular que chamaremos de “crísicas”, seguindo um artigo de Edgar Morin (MORIN, 1984). Começaremos por considerar o lazer como aquilo que constitui a maior parte da cultura popular, se não mesmo a sua totalidade. Em seguida, buscaremos definir a cultura popular não tanto em termos de conteúdos, mas em termos de dinâmica, ou seja, como um campo específico das relações sociais. Nesse contexto, compreenderemos o lúdico como sendo o elemento que pode, num dado momento, desorganizar as relações de força no interior de um campo, promovendo dessa maneira uma crise. Em outras palavras, nós tentaremos compreender o que é “crísico” no lúdico, ou seja, o que faz do lúdico um elemento potencialmente transformador das relações sociais. Para tanto, utilizaremos como estudo de caso um evento popular, o “Retome a sua rua”, que ocorre anualmente na cidade de Quebec, no Canadá. PLAYFULNESS AND CRISIS IN POPULAR LEISURE ABSTRACT : This article’s main goal is to consider the “crisics” dimensions of popular leisure. We follow here the « crisis » concept developed by Edgar Morin in 1984. First of all, we consider leisure the major component of popular culture. Secondly, we propose to understand popular culture not in terms of its contents; instead, in terms of its dynamics. Therefore popular culture is taken as a specific field of social relationships. We employ the concept of “playfulness” in order to designate those aspects that can deregulate the field’s force relationships, at one given moment. “Playfulness” is therefore an element that promotes crisis. We are interested in knowing what is “crisic” in the playfulness, and how it potentially transforms social relationships. Finally, we analyze the playful elements that can be found in “Reclaim the Street”, a popular event that occurs each year in Quebec City.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 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".