Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une ethnographie du Jour de la marmotte à Wiarton (Canada), nous analysons en quoi la marmotte révèle un profond anthropocentrisme. Dans cette ville, comme ailleurs, la marmotte ne prédit rien mais les participants travestissent ses gestes et simulent des prédictions sur une scène de théâtre. En contexte naturaliste, les humains continuent d’échouer à nouer des relations étroites avec cet animal dont ils ont fait un objet-spectacle, un véritable simulacre. La marmotte est instrumentalisée à des fins socioéconomiques si bien que la question du bien-être de l’animal est esquivée. Les pratiques divinatoires autour de la marmotte montrent qu’au sein même des sociétés modernes, cette activité se marie bien avec le spectaculaire. Les humains ne font plus danser la marmotte mais ils continuent de l’exhiber, prétendant qu’elle leur indique l’avenir. Ils ne la voient plus comme un animal nuisible mais comme une source de revenu.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".