Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il y a façon et façon de suivre des traces, de relever les signes d'un passage recouvert par le temps, de redécouvrir un sentier tellement peu battu que rien ne serait plus facile que de venir à douter de son existence.Et il faut, justement, tout d'abord et avant toute autre chose, croire que le sentier existe, être capable de le sentir, de le deviner, et ensuite de le voir et de le montrer là où, selon une tradition bien établie, respectée, réitérée, indiscutée, il n'y a, par définition, que croissance désordonnée, chaotique, insensée, victime de sa propre exubérance.Il faut pour cela un œil d'un genre tout à fait particulier, de ceux qui ne se contentent pas de rester ébahis et grands-ouverts devant les beautés déjà chantées par d'autres.Un œil un peu ironique, à moitié caché par une paupière pensive toujours prête à se lever d'un coup pour laisser passer un regard pétillant de malice et de subtilité.Le type de regard qu'avait Charles Grivel.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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".