MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084326558 · doi:10.1177/0037768620950313

Le numérisme : un objet religieux ? Problématisation et notes théoriques

2020· article· en· W3084326558 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Philippe Perreault, Martin Vaillancourt

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Compass · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)DigitizationPhenomenonReligiosityObject (grammar)EpistemologySociologyTheme (computing)Dimension (graph theory)Set (abstract data type)The InternetPhilosophyTheologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the most part, studies on the relationship between religion and digital can be grouped under the theme Digital Religion. Without being totally foreign to it, the phenomenon we are interested in here seems to be of a different order. Rather than ‘digitized religion’, we are confronted with what we might understand as a quest for digital meaning. Some authors who have described this technological religiosity argue that it serves to legitimize the belief in a new society. The study of what we have called ‘digitization’ would therefore be based on the sacralization of a set of techno-values, of which the internet would be both the tool of broadcast and the main symbolic object. If we recognize that religion has something to do with society’s idea of itself, we can ask ourselves whether the digital revolution, by generating a new type of society, does not contain a religious dimension.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.047
Scholarly communication0.0100.016
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial CompassSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207