Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se propose de questionner la façon dont les temporalités sociales et académiques d’un chercheur peuvent peser sur les dispositifs et les postures d’enquête qu’il peut engager sur son objet. Pour illustrer cela, il revient sur une enquête par observation participante menée dans une école d’officiers en France par l’auteure dans le cadre de son doctorat. L’article montre comment « l’engagement » sur le terrain et la participation de l’auteure aux luttes de distinction des officiers eux-mêmes ont pu répondre certes à des questionnements théoriques relevant d’une tradition scientifique revendiquée, mais aussi à des enjeux de positionnements professionnels typiques d’une chercheuse non titulaire, alors relativement peu dotée en ressources académiques. Il montre comment et pourquoi l’engagement ethnographique « outre mesure » peut être envisagé et constitué comme une ressource académique et scientifique alternative pour un type particulier de jeunes prétendants au métier de chercheur.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".