Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce volume propose une réflexion théorique sur la notion de transfrontalier, à partir de l’analyse circonstanciée de pratiques et de représentations du transfrontalier prélevées dans des contextes divers – région trinationale du Rhin Supérieur, eurorégion Saar-Lor-Lux, Canada francophone, Chine communiste... Ce sont les aspects sociaux (emploi, configurations familiales), logistiques (transports, navettes) et médiatiques (presse/télévision/internet) du transfrontalier comme ses expressions artistiques qui sont au cœur de ce recueil auquel ont contribué des représentants de multiples disciplines, de la sociologie à la critique littéraire en passant par les sciences de l’information et de la communication, les sciences de l’éducation, ou encore l’archéologie. This volume proposes a theoretical reflection on the notion of the cross-border, based on a detailed analysis of practices and representations of the cross-border taken from various contexts - the trinational region of the Upper Rhine, the Saar-Lor-Lux Euroregion, French-speaking Canada, Communist China... The social (employment, family configurations), logistical (transport, commuting) and media (press/television/internet) aspects of the cross-border area, as well as its artistic expressions, are at the heart of this collection, to which representatives of multiple disciplines have contributed, from sociology to literary criticism, including information and communication sciences, educational sciences, and archaeology.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".