Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article est un retour réflexif sur le cheminement d’une chercheuse travaillant sur les rapports sociaux de sexe et le mouvement ouvrier, en histoire et en sociologie : réflexion sur l’évolution de ses supports de recherche (rapport aux sources orales, à l’image), sur les outils facilitant une transmission, sur la confrontation à de nouveaux langages pour rendre compte de la recherche, sur de nouvelles pratiques pour sortir de l’entre-soi universitaire, s’enrichir des réactions d’un public qui a été – ou pas – partie prenante de l’étude. Et, en amont, faciliter la production d’une réflexion par les personnes enquêtées, pour qu’elles deviennent, dans une certaine mesure, sujets et pas seulement objets, s’approprient la démarche et participent, par exemple, à l’élaboration du contenu d’un texte théâtral sur la thématique des stéréotypes sexués. En transversal, la question de la posture de la chercheuse, du rapport entre connivence, empathie et altérité.
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 | 0.029 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".