MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211607680 · doi:10.4000/rief.8122

Rando, trek, promenade… des mots pour quel(s) sport(s) ? De la construction du discours d’autorité dans les blogs de tourisme d’aventure

2021· article· fr· W3211607680 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Vicari

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue italienne d’études françaises · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsHistorical Studies in Education
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cette contribution, j’analyserai les stratégies techno-discursives adoptées par des blogueurs-influenceurs de sports de marche de montagne (le trek, la promenade, la rando, le trail, etc.) dans leurs blogs en ligne, pour créer un discours d’autorité, digne de confiance. Après avoir cerné le phénomène des blogueurs-influenceurs dans le cadre du tourisme d’aventure, je montrerai que ce discours repose essentiellement sur la construction discursive d’un éthos numérique de crédibilité et sur des stratégies techno-discursives leur permettant d’augmenter leur visibilité et/ou de s’adresser tant à un public d’initiés qu’à de simples passionnés, voire curieux, souhaitant s’investir pour la première fois dans la pratique de sports d’aventure.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue italienne d’études françaisesSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207