Post-face : Interdisciplinarité et hybridité : de la nécessité du décloisonnement dans la recherche scientifique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il nous revient ici la tâche de conclure un ouvrage qui aborde un sujet qui ne se clot pas, refuse les barrieres, echappe alors meme que l’on tente de le circonscrire. L’idee de cet ouvrage est nee a la suite d’un colloque international organise a l’Universite Lyon III-Jean Moulin en mars 2014 avec le soutien du Theâtre du Lavoir Public. Pendant deux jours, des universitaires venus de France, d’Iran, du Bresil, d’Algerie, du Canada se sont reuni(e)s, pour penser, ensemble, la construction identitaire, ses enjeux, ses limites, mais aussi la difficulte meme de sa definition. Ceci se faisant sur des territoires geographiques, socioculturels fort differents et au prisme des pratiques artistiques et culturelles, tout aussi bien du cote des artistes que des publics. Les debats furent riches, intenses, enthousiastes, toujours respectueux et soucieux d’entendre la parole de cet Autre dont nous ne cessons de parler. Nous avons tente d’aller au-dela des cloisonnements epistemologiques, theoriques ou methodologiques car, force est de constater que nous partagions egalement tout un champ de references. De Stuart Hall a Judith Butler, de Vincent Descombes a Amin Maalouf, nous avancions en terrain (de recherches) connu. Nous defendons l’idee que l’interdisciplinarite, la trans-historicite, la diversite des approches methodologiques et la pluralite des espaces et des champs de recherches qui se retrouvent dans ces pages, forment la condition necessaire a une reflexion sereine, enrichissante
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 | 0.044 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".