Des joies et des difficultés inhérentes à la défense de la liberté académique d’un point de vue sémiotique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La question de la liberté académique est traitée ici dans la perspective particulière des études sémiotiques. Nulle liberté n’existant sans la contrepartie qui la borde, la notion de critique est identifiée comme contrainte inhérente à l’activité de recherche qui définit le travail de la sémiotique. D’après les théories de Charles S. Peirce sur la critique et un commentaire récent d’André De Tienne sur le sujet, une finalité pour la discipline sémiotique est proposée, qui s’accorde au caractère public de la signification. Ce parcours théorique a pour ambition de clarifier les enjeux de la recherche sémiotique et critique, mais surtout de faire valoir, sous des airs de manifeste, les standards de qualité et les exigences éditoriales qui caractérisent la revue Cygne noir. Pour ses artisans, la liberté académique est conçue d’abord comme une responsabilité en partage.
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 | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".