MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791761672 · doi:10.3917/pox.120.0007

Vers un enracinement cosmopolite

2018· article· fr· W2791761672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Émilie Biland, Fabien Desage

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitix · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitantHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans un livre désormais classique, le politiste américain Sydney Tarrow soulignait les ressources internes mobilisées par les militant·e·s engagé·e·s dans des causes transnationales, évoquant des formes de « cosmopolitisme enraciné ». En analysant le développement récent des circulations entre la France et le Québec, cet article montre, de manière symétrique, combien la comparaison internationale constitue une dimension de plus en plus fréquente, voire obligée, de pratiques sociales et politiques ancrées localement et/ou nationalement. Ainsi, et en dépit des multiples différences qui caractérisent ces sociétés si souvent rapprochées, la France et le Québec tendent à former un vis-à-vis comparatif , dont les ressortissant·e·s, chercheur·e·s mais aussi et surtout fonctionnaires, militant·e·s, élu·e·s, journalistes – tendent à se comparer. Défendant une épistémologie réflexive, cet article invite donc les comparatistes savants à interroger leurs propres méthodes, en tenant compte des usages ordinaires de la comparaison parmi leurs enquêté·e·s (qui se comparent, autant qu’on les compare), ainsi que des enjeux internes de ce comparatisme désormais généralisé.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.029
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.217
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitixSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207