Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il est faux de dire, comme le fait Aznavour dans le dernier vers de sa célèbre chanson, que la bohème, « ça ne veut plus rien dire du tout ». Tout au contraire, les clichés de la bohème restent largement partagés et le mot appelle toujours, de nos jours, une multitude d’images, de scènes et de personnages types. Cet ouvrage explore l’imaginaire de la bohème, ses modes de constitution, de représentation, de légitimation et de diffusion dans et au-delà des frontières géographiques et culturelles de la France. On peut être bohème à Paris en 1900, mais peut-on l’être aussi bien à Buenos Aires, à New York, à Madrid ou à Montréal à la même époque ? Qu’impliquent, pour des disciplines aussi différentes que les études littéraires, la sociologie ou l’histoire l’émergence, la perpétuation et le transfert culturel du mythe de la bohème ? C’est à ces questions cruciales qu’une vingtaine de spécialistes français, américains et canadiens ont voulu répondre ici.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.011 |
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".