L’institution imaginaire de la société entrepreneuriale : une enquête dans l’entrepreneuriat rap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’entrepreneuriat a toujours été associé à un imaginaire puissant. En prenant appui sur Castoriadis (1975), cette recherche explore certains enjeux de l’imaginaire dans le développement et la régulation de la société entrepreneuriale. Un récit autoethnographique complété par de l’observation participante montre que les pratiques et récits de l’entrepreneuriat rap peuvent être compris comme constitués à partir de l’imaginaire hip hop. Et que sous l’impulsion du développement des technologies numériques, l’imaginaire institué s’est en partie reformulé, toutefois à partir du même fond imaginaire instituant. L’imaginaire instituant est alors décrit comme un magma qui inspire et à partir duquel se créent les pratiques et institutions. Cette perspective invite à réfléchir à l’imaginaire instituant sur lequel s’érige la société entrepreneuriale dont Audrescht et Thurik prédisent l’avènement et aux imaginaires institués susceptibles de s’imposer.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".