Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se veut une reflexion sur ce que peuvent representer les milieux dʼaltitude pour des communautes de chasseurs-collecteurs ; sur les strategies a mettre en oeuvre par ces memes communautes pour les aborder et les exploiter, et sur les considerations assez abstraites dʼune attirance et souvent dʼune certaine veneration pour un milieu surnaturel. Il detaille les schemes de mobilite et discute les concepts de « nomadisme » et de « semi-nomadisme ». Lʼidee de depart se base sur un schema etabli a la suite de plusieurs annees de recherches sur le Paleolithique dans les Alpes (TILLET, 2001a). Cet article est le premier dʼune serie destinee a comparer le schema paleoalpin a dʼautres, reveles par les chasseurs-collecteurs amerindiens de Colombie-Britannique, du Yukon et de lʼAlaska, pour un milieu subarctique, egalement de moyenne montagne. Cette recherche tente dʼisoler quelques habitus lies aux conditions associees a cet etat particulier de situations de contraintes. Son objectif est lʼidentification des mecanismes possibles, a partir dʼun travail interdisciplinaire de comparaison contextuelle et synthetique, sur des regles de comportement dans lʼexploitation de lʼanimal en altitude, sans evidemment utiliser directement lʼanalogie. Cette identification recherche des similarites ou des constantes parmi les regles de comportement isolees, et tente de les comprendre sans chercher absolument a les assimiler. Le but est dʼanalyser la structure des comportements inconscients et collectifs et de proposer des modeles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".