La Notion De Secret Analysée À L’Aune De Ses Valeurs Licite Et Illicite Et De La Pensée (The Notion of Secrecy Analyzed in Terms of Its Plural Reality)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Le concept de secret renvoie a un objet du monde qui a la fois verrouille les evenements et la perception que l’on peut en avoir, les protege, les travestit ou encore les occulte. Dans ce present article, nous tenterons d’analyser comment le secret, en dissimulant tout ou partie d’un objet du monde, ouvre sur des territoires semantiques fort divers les uns des autres. Par ailleurs, il sera interroge le secret en tant que pourvoyeur d’une forme de pouvoir s’exercant sur les groupes ou les individus en relation avec ce type de communication.English Abstract: The concept of secret refers to an object of the world that simultaneously locks the events and the perception that one can have, protects them or even transform them. In this article, we attempt to analyze how the secret, by concealing all or part of an object of the world, opens on different semantic territories. In addition, it will be questioned the secret as a purveyor of a form of power acting on the groups or individuals who are connected with this form of communication.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".