Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’étude qui suit interroge la matérialité de l’album pour la jeunesse, en s’intéressant aussi bien aux formes imprimées qu’aux formes numériques – et aux relations qu’elles entretiennent entre elles – à l’époque contemporaine. Elle propose, en s'appuyant sur certains travaux de Ségolène Le Men, de (re)définir l'album comme un support capable de prendre en compte les modalités profanatrices d'appropriation du livre par un lectorat qui ignore encore les codes, le rituel, le protocole de la lecture (un lectorat qui secoue, déchire, gribouille, tient le livre à l'envers, commence par la fin, etc.). À la question de savoir si le livre numérique pour enfant, fondé sur la lecture tactile et sur une interactivité inhérente au support, constitue un relai numérique à cette dynamique de la littérature de jeunesse, c’est-à-dire, si l’on peut envisager l’émergence d’un album numérique pour la jeunesse, l’étude conclut sur un relatif échec, pour l’instant, de la littérature de jeunesse numérique à développer une forme d’indicialité authentique, capable d’accueillir le geste profanateur de l’enfant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".