Heurs et malheurs de la lutte contre la double peine. ", Sociologie et sociétés, XLI (2), 2009, pp. 63-87
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'etude des fluctuations des relations entre systeme politique et mouvements contestataires a principalement ete etudiee, dans la litterature sur les mouvements sociaux, au moyen du concept de structure des opportunites politiques. Devant les faiblesses de cette approche, l'article propose une perspective alternative, centree autour du concept, inspire notamment de celui de champ propose par Bourdieu, d'espace des mouvements sociaux. Il entend en montrer l'apport heuristique a travers de l'etude des avancees et des reculs d'un meme mouvement francais, la lutte contre la double peine (une pratique judiciaire ou administrative qui consiste en l'expulsion des delinquants etrangers) sur la periode 1968-2003. L'evolution des relations d'interdependance entre le sous-espace de la defense des etrangers et le champ politique, elles-memes fortement influencees par les dynamiques et recompositions internes a ces deux univers, permet d'expliquer les resultats contrastes, au fil du temps, obtenus par le mouvement contre la double peine.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".