Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le projet de la sociologie comme science du social semble marginalisé aujourd’hui. Plutôt que d’appréhender une crise de la sociologie, cet article vise à explorer les modalités d’une coopération élargie entre les sociologues, coopération nécessitant de clarifier les rapports à l’éthique et à la politique propres à cette forme de connaissance qu’est la sociologie. Pour ce faire, il s’agit d’abord de revenir sur une proposition antérieure d’orienter la sociologie vers un travail qui se définirait collectivement comme « un pluralisme sous contraintes » (Berthelot, 2003 : 35). À partir de l’étude des fondements et des limites de cette approche du travail collectif des sociologues, il est proposé de mieux tenir compte à la fois des conditions générales de l’état des savoirs sociaux et des conditions nécessaires pour constituer une dialectique interne à la sociologie, afin de permettre l’autogestion par les chercheurs d’un projet circonscrit à l’explication de l’irréductibilité sociale de la vie humaine.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".