Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article porte sur la vision professionnelle des radiologues spécialisé·e·s dans l’endométriose. Le diagnostic y est appréhendé comme un dispositif d’authentification des corps. Il s’agit d’aborder, d’une part, les enjeux liés à la division du travail médical et, d’autre part, ceux liés à l’apprentissage d’habiletés techniques et sensorielles, en cherchant à montrer leur imbrication et leurs implications pour faire advenir au monde une maladie – l’endométriose. La démonstration procède en deux temps : la première partie porte sur le travail de légitimation de l’expertise visuelle des radiologues à travers un travail de frontières avec la chirurgie gynécologique ayant entraîné un déplacement de juridiction au sein du processus diagnostique ; la deuxième partie se centre sur la façon dont les radiologues apprennent à voir l’endométriose et à donner sens aux images produites par le biais de la mobilisation d’un ensemble de prises et repères perceptuels.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".