Questionner l’intervention collective? Facilite-elle la participation des citoyennes et des citoyens dans la société par leur positionnement critique?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Est-ce que toutes les interventions collectives se valent? Que facilite chacune d’elles? Quels sont les facteurs et les valeurs qu’on peut prendre en considération pour que la notion d’intervention collective ne soit pas une « coquille vide », un mot passe-partout? L’intervention collective contribue-t-elle au renforcement du droit de la citoyenne et du citoyen de prendre la parole dans leur communauté et de s’exprimer librement sur ce qui les concerne? Comment agit cette intervention dans notre région, Abitibi-Témiscamingue, pour que leur parole soit prise en considération dans la construction de sens commun? Ce droit de s’exprimer librement est-il compris comme permettant la participation citoyenne et comme fondement de la citoyenneté dans un système démocratique?
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 | 0.017 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".