Les recherches partenariales/collaboratives : Peut-on simultanément théoriser et agir?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Notre article interroge la montée de la recherche partenariale ou collaborative (RPC) aux côtés de la recherche universitaire « classique ». Nous nous demandons dans quelle mesure la pratique de la recherche partenariale contribue à l'émergence de processus de collaboration, de médiation, de partage de connaissances, voire de « co-construction » de connaissances. La recherche partenariale vise à favoriser une collaboration continue et engagée de membres provenant de divers milieux, de la recherche mais aussi du terrain ou de la pratique. Nous montrons que les différences de rôles, de contextes de travail, de temporalités, d’identité peuvent expliquer les difficultés de mise en place d’échanges entre les divers milieux (universitaire, communautaire, syndicaux, ou autres, selon les cas) et nous identifions aussi les avantages de la RPC et les conditions permettant de profiter de ces avantages.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it