Bibliographic record
Abstract
In light of the recent political events, it is clear that democracy itself has come to be contested and modified in a plethora of democratic practices that have expanded the very articulation of equal citizenship. My argument in this article is twofold: first, I rearticulate Arendt’s conception of “revolution” found in her On Revolution by insisting on its “beginning” and “founding” dimensions for the appearance of freedom. Coupled with Jean-Luc Nancy’s insight into a “spirit of democracy” that does not reside in its “form, institution, regime,” I then develop a principle of democratic responsibility that consists in opening up a revolutionary space that enjoins us to become a demos. Such revolutionary space does not necessarily entail a “successful revolution,” but more so an attitude towards our existence together.À la lumière des événements politiques récents, il est clair que la démocratie elle-même en est venue à être contestée et modifiée en une myriade de pratiques démocratiques qui étendent l’articulation de la citoyenneté égalitaire. Mon argument dans cet article est double. Premièrement, je réarticule la conception arendtienne de « révolution » telle qu’on la retrouve dans De la révolution en insistant sur ses dimensions de « commencement » et de « fondation » pour l’apparition de la liberté. À l’aide de l’idée, articulée par Jean-Luc Nancy, d’un « esprit de la démocratie » qui ne réside pas dans une « forme, institution, ou régime », je développe, dans un deuxième temps, un principe de responsabilité démocratique qui consiste à ouvrir un espace révolutionnaire dans lequel nous sommes appelés à devenir un demos. Un tel espace n’implique en rien le « succès » de la révolution mais plutôt une attitude envers notre existence en commun.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.010 |
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".