Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous essaierons de déterminer la place de la culture de masse et les points d’articulations entre la culture élitaire, la culture de masse et la culture populaire/folklorique. Notre propos est structuré selon les axes suivants : d’une part, il reconstruit le processus au cours duquel la recherche scientifique a découvert et a identifié la culture populaire hongroise et ses diverses fonctions, et s’efforce ensuite de mettre en lumière les manières dont les récentes tendances du folklorisme et de la patrimonialisation ont essayé de ‘revitaliser’ cette culture. D’autre part, on attirera l’attention sur la façon dont les différents médias de masse ont été ‘domestiqués’ par les usagers dans la vie de tous les jours, produisant une sorte de culture populaire. Troisièmement, l’article rassemble également, à partir de l’exemple de la Roumanie, plus exactement du territoire transylvain, les caractéristiques d’une culture de masse du régime communiste/socialiste.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".