MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943924155 · doi:10.4000/belphegor.1607

Une bande dessinée adulte ? Usages et mésusages de la légitimation

2019· article· fr· W2943924155 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sylvain Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueBelphégor · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article revisite la question de la légitimation telle que Luc Boltanski la mobilise pour analyser la constitution du champ de la bande dessinée dans le premier numéro des Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales. J’y montre la manière dont la sociologie bourdieusienne de la culture construit tout autant qu’elle décrit la question de la légitimité, en minorant les pratiques de lecture adultes et en adoptant une posture légitimiste. J’analyse également le pouvoir légitimant d’un article devenu totémique dans la recherche sur la bande dessinée, et les impensés de cette posture légitimante.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBelphégorSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207