Bibliographic record
Abstract
A história do livro é uma invenção alemã nascida das celebrações de Gutenberg, festejadas anualmente naquele país. No último terço do século XIX, em França, Durkheim desenvolveu uma escola sociológica influente que pretendeu anexar a história. Contra o que se opôs um dos seus companheiros da Escola superior normal, Henri Berr. Desde logo acompanhado pelo jovem Lucien Febvre, criou a Revue de synthèse que abriu caminho aos Annales e fundou a colecção da Evolution de L'Humanité, cujos cem volumes deveriam estudar os grandes momentos da história humana. De entre os volumes previstos, figurava um dedicado à Apparition du Livre que demorou a surgir. Paralelamente Berr e Febvre organizaram um trabalho interdisciplinar fecundo, o primeiro com o Centre de Synthése, o segundo com a publicação de uma Encyclopédie française, o que renovou a escola histórica francesa. A Apparition du Livre, publicada em 1959, inscreve-se neste contexto, mas ficou de certa forma incompleta na medida em que se deveria ter inscrito, mais claramente, no quadro de uma história geral das comunicações que se começa hoje a desenvolver.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.006 |
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".