L'espace transnational et la localité : le réseautage et la sédimentation du passage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conceptualizing the locality today in the global context means to be able to consider a level of denationalisation of the actor (of a locality) participating in a networked situation with actors from other localities. This thesis introduces a new conceptualization of the locality participating in a transnational network. The network, CEARENAD, involved six localities (Brazil, Chili, Costa-Rica, Senegal, Mauritius and Canada) who co-constructed contents for five years. This research is about presenting not a "mode d'emploi" about whether this particular network was successful or not. What truly motivated me, during and about this research, was to reflect on my observations of this network to build a new conceptualisation about the intertwinments of a locality and another space. This is what this thesis is about. "La sedimentation du passage" renders a rigorous description of the numerous processes which bring the locality to the front line. This study shows the description (Latour: 1987, 1999) of the participative actions of the actors involved in the network. The sedimentation of the passage reveals the repercussions of the mediations between the localities. This theorization activates, in other ways, the denationalization of actors, and, adds to the cultural construct of the network as well as to the possibilities of the Politic (Sassen: 2006). This is an example of a networked knowledge production while, at the same time, and this may be of most importance, it is also an example of how today's reading of the locality deepens the necessity of participative actions in the mediations and mediatizations (Darbellay: 2006) of materialities in the contemporary globalization. The sedimentation of the passage allows one to read what circulation(s) are actually chosen to be materialized in and for the locality.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".