Évolution de la revue Management international : Une modélisation thématique des articles publiés entre 2009 et 2023
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysing 829 abstracts and articles published in Management International over the 2009-2023 period, this research highlights the difficulties of interpreting unstructured textual data and suggests in response a tool capable of providing automated analysis. It also uses Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) theme modelling to uncover hidden structures and achieve a more granular understanding of the thematic framework within which the journal has operated. The spotlight here is on data pre-processing, validation and visualisation, all crucial aspects of the types of analyses that become feasible when this method is used. The paper ends by suggesting a thematic modelling best practice that should make it possible to identify major and minor trends in order that future editorial strategies may be better informed and potentially more cutting-edge in nature.
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 | 0.028 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.032 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".