Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans nos societes contemporaines, la mobilite est elevee au rang de qualite cardinale et, a l'inverse, l'ancrage renvoie au lexique negatif du manque de dynamisme. Les parcours des jeunes de milieux populaires que nous avons enquetes par entretiens laissent distinctement entrevoir que la mobilite n'est pas une posture individuelle et sociale plus positive que l'ancrage. Les jeunes mobiles, a la difference des ancres, sont plutot en situation de rupture familiale et ne disposant pas de soutiens rapproches sur lesquels s'appuyer, leurs pratiques de mobilite procedent bien plus de contraintes que d'un choix construit et anticipe. Inversement, les jeunes de milieux populaires qui ne sont pas mobiles et prolongent la cohabitation au domicile parental sont en situation de pouvoir beneficier des solidarites familiales qui leur permettent, faute d'acceder a l'independance economique et residentielle par l'entree dans l'activite professionnelle stable, d'attendre en etant securises materiellement et affectivement. L'article souligne par ailleurs les ambivalences attachees tant aux pratiques de mobilite qu'a l'ancrage territorial.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.008 |
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".