Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au début des années 2000, le champ des biotechnologies a vu émerger un nouveau domaine pluridisciplinaire, celui de la biologie de synthèse. Il consiste à modifier génétiquement des micro-organismes, en combinant la biologie moléculaire avec des outils du génie génétique et de l’informatique. Quelle conception du vivant sous-tendent ces pratiques et ces innovations ? Parmi les principales, on trouve celle qui assimile le vivant à une machine. Ce résultat provient d’une enquête menée auprès d’une quarantaine d’acteurs travaillant dans le domaine de la biologie de synthèse. Afin de rendre compte de cette vision machinique d’un « vivant programmable », l’article aborde en premier lieu le caractère ludique de cette activité. Une telle conception du vivant est plus largement liée à une évolution de la biologie accordant une large place aux mathématiques et à l’informatique. Ce mouvement vers un « vivant programmable » traduit in fine un accroissement de l’instrumentalisation du vivant.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".