Au cœur de la fabrique deleuzienne. Note de lecture sur Vincent Jacques, "Deleuze"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CHARLES BOLDUCPassées la fascination première, les fulgurances initiales et l'impression de découvrir un nouveau monde plein de richesses insoupçonnées, la lecture de l'œuvre de Gilles Deleuze déroute souvent les néophytes par cet étrange alliage de visées systématiques ambitieuses 1 et de références hétéroclites 2 , ce qui laisse fréquemment perplexe quand vient le temps d'adopter un point de vue critique qui se refuse à tout accepter ou rejeter en bloc.Maître-assistant à l'École nationale supérieure d'architecture de Versailles (France) et auteur d'une thèse de doctorat intitulée La notion de problème chez Gilles Deleuze, Vincent Jacques résume bien cette situation dès les premières pages de son ouvrage, et sa monographie offre une manière de s'y retrouver un peu mieux dans cette œuvre.En ce sens, son livre est même une réponse deleuzienne au Qu'est-ce que s'orienter dans la pensée?Kantien, qui revient constamment sous sa plume comme un leitmotiv lancinant (Jacques 5, 26, 108, 144, 173).
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".