Introduction: « Humanités numériques: identités, pratiques et théories »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digital technologies have profoundly changed our research practices, our editing and publication practices, and how we exchange information. The means have certainly changed, but these striking changes have also influenced the methods and meaning of writing, the concepts of writer and reader, and the methods of access, the tools and methods of distributing texts, images, sounds, etc. Literature has played a major role in the development of cultural domains; it still holds a prominent place, perhaps even more so today, as our current context is greatly associated to the predominance of the textual form. The explosion of data and the transformation of knowledge, both in terms of the quality of available information and the manner of representing it, have furthermore had a considerable impact on human and social sciences research. This special issue, which brings texts together from presentations made at the 2015 Digital Humanities colloquium at Concordia University, offers an overview of current trends in theory and practice observed in the digital humanities domain in French, more specifically in the sphere of production and distribution of knowledge in the human and social sciences. Résumé Les technologies numériques ont profondément modifié nos pratiques de recherche, d’édition, de publication et d’échanges d’informations. Les supports ont certes changé, mais les bouleversements ont aussi touché les modalités et le sens de l’écriture, les concepts d’auteur et de lecteur, les modalités d’accès, les supports et les modes de diffusion de textes, d’images, de sons, etc. Si la littérature a toujours joué un rôle capital dans la formation des catégories culturelles, elle s’approprie de manière peut-être encore plus marquée aujourd’hui, une place fondamentale, puisque le contexte actuel est largement associé à une prédominance de la forme textuelle. L’explosion des données et la transformation des savoirs, tant au plan de la quantité d’information disponible que de la manière de la représenter, a en outre un impact considérable sur la recherche en sciences humaines et sociales. Ce dossier spécial, qui rassemble des textes découlant de communications présentées lors du colloque Humanités numériques 2015 à l’Université Concordia, propose un aperçu des tendances théoriques et pratiques observées actuellement dans le domaine des humanités numériques en français, plus précisément dans la sphère de production et de diffusion du savoir dans les sciences humaines et sociales. Mots clés: Humanités numériques; outils de recherche; tendances théoriques et pratiques; édition électronique; pédagogie numérique; visualisation
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
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".