Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’érudition des fans de science-fiction s’est vigoureusement exprimée dans le champ littéraire français, dans la revue Fiction d’abord, puis dans des encyclopédies, et enfin sur des supports numériques tels que le forum d’ActuSF. C’est à partir de ce dernier que nous proposons de réfléchir à l’érudition des amateurs en science-fiction, en particulier en nous fondant sur le cas exceptionnel d’un fil de discussion alimenté entre le 28 octobre 2009 et le 17 octobre 2010, intitulé « Du Sense of Wonder à la SF métaphysique ». Ce fil de discussion a attiré de nombreux intervenants, souvent des érudits majeurs, mais de toute façon des fans et connaisseurs. L’ironie et la provocation n’y ont pas tout à fait pris le dessus sur l’argumentation et la démonstration, si bien qu’il représente un modèle remarquable de la réflexion collective en science-fiction.
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 | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".