Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article soutient que la littérature savante sur l’étude des scènes est marquée par une divergence entre deux façons de les concevoir. Les conceptualisations « ouvertes » de la scène la traite comme une manifestation large de l’urbanité, comme partie intégrante de la théâtralité de la vie urbaine. Une « scène », en ce sens, est engagée dans l’insufflation au sein des citadins des valeurs et protocoles éthiques de l’urbanité. Les conceptions « restreintes » de la scène l’approche en termes de formes d’organisation qui entourent certaines formes culturelles, comme des genres de musique. Cependant, on pourrait imaginer la réconciliation de ces façons de concevoir la scène, chacune ayant généré ses propres traditions de recherche et mobilisant des domaines distincts de l’analyse culturelle. Chacune présuppose aussi différentes façons de penser la visibilité des scènes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".