Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une enquête réalisée à Montréal dans un groupe militant pour le droit à l’éducation pour les enfants sans-papiers, on discutera de la place de l’enquêteur en terrain militant et des problèmes, classiques en ethnographie et décisifs dans l’étude des mobilisations, qui se nouent autour de son double statut d’observateur et de participant. On commencera par décrire certaines contraintes qui ont configuré l’enquête comme une participation-observante à découvert, comme la politique d’enquête des enquêtés qui confronte l’enquêteur à un impératif participatif. Ensuite, on défendra l’idée que l’implication de l’enquêteur, qui s’éloigne d’une « épistémologie de la non-perturbation », ouvre des voies d’investigation intéressantes ; on abordera en même temps la question des limites de sa participation. Enfin, on formulera des propositions de solutions à deux dilemmes rencontrés au fil de cette enquête in situ : le respect des règles des comités d’éthique et « l’enclicage » de l’enquêteur.
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 | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".