Circula : revue d'idéologies linguistiques. Numéro 3 (printemps 2016), Images de langues minoritaires en Méditerranée : dynamiques sociolinguistiques et productions idéologiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article expose la méthodologie de recherche suivie par les différents auteurs des articles.Il s'agit de la méthode d'analyse combinée des représentations sociales.Un exposé définit les différents types de représentation sociale ; il est suivi d'un regard critique sur les méthodes habituellement utilisées puis d'une présentation de l'ensemble des étapes à suivre pour réaliser des enquêtes Mots-clés : représentations sociales ; outil d'enquête ; méthode d'analyse combinéeAbstract: This article outlines the research methodology used by the authors of the articles, known as the combined method of analysis of social representations («méthode d'analyse combinée des représentations sociales».A presentation defines the different types of social representation; it is followed by a critical view of the commonly used methods and a presentation of all the steps involved in conducting surveys
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.010 |
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".