Bibliographic record
Abstract
One could have imagined that in 2014, Scotland had renewed its bond with the United Kindom; after all, 55.3% of Scots had answered “No” to the question “Should Scotland be an independent country?”, and only 44.7%, “Yes”. Two years later, the Brexit referendum changed things dramatically, since contrary to what had happened everywhere else in the UK, the “Remain” vote won 62% to 38% in Scotland. This state of affairs allowed the SNP to make itself heard more audibly than ever before: there definitely was an incompatibility between the Scottish nation and British rule, and an inconsistency to the very notion of United Kingdom (see for example Nicola Sturgeon’s speech from 13 March 2017). Scotland, then, sees itself again as an “other” within the British fold—but what, precisely, is Scotland like in the eyes of others? What is at stake when Scotland is represented elsewhere, politically, artistically, legally or in culture at large? What meanings does the signifier, “Scotland”, take in Canada, for the European Union, or when it circulates as an idea, within the borders of the United Kingdom but also internationally? Conversely, has this detour by otherness been the opportunity for Scotland to think back on itself, reflexively? Those are some of the questions the contributors of this issue address, in a pluridisciplinary approach. On aurait pu penser qu’en 2014, l’Écosse avait par référendum renouvelé son appartenance au Royaume‑Uni : à la question « Should Scotland be an independent country? », le « No » l’avait emporté par 55,3 %, contre 44,7 %. Deux ans plus tard, le référendum sur le Brexit a rebattu les cartes, car si presque partout en Grande‑Bretagne, le « Leave » l’a emporté, tel n’a pas été le cas en Écosse (62 % de votes pour le « Remain »). Cette dynamique a permis notamment au SNP de trouver un écho large à sa vision de l’incompatibilité de la nation écossaise avec un joug britannique incohérent (cf. Nicola Sturgeon, discours du 13 mars 2017). L’Écosse en vient donc encore une fois à se penser comme un « ailleurs », mais précisément, qu’en est‑il dans les faits de l’Écosse telle que vue d’ailleurs ? Quels enjeux la représentation de l’Écosse au sein d’une culture qui n’est pas elle‑même a‑t‑elle servis, en termes politiques, artistiques, littéraires, voire légaux ? De quoi le signifiant « Écosse » est‑il le nom au Canada, pour l’Union européenne, ou dans l’image culturelle qui en circule au sein du Royaume‑Uni ou à l’international, dans les interprétations différentes des adaptations de la pièce Macbeth notamment ? Ce détour par « l’autre » a‑t‑il été le lieu par ailleurs d’une récursivité pour l’Écosse elle‑même, qui se verrait ainsi offrir la possibilité de se penser au miroir de l’autre ? Telles sont les questions que ce numéro se propose de traiter, dans une approche pluridisciplinaire.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 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".