Explosions et représentations : vignettes scientifiques et culturelles des éruptions du Taal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans son ouvrage The Mysteries of Taal, Hargrove (1991) décrit le volcan Taal à la fois comme une bénédiction et une malédiction. Ce mélange de caractères ainsi qu’un relief géologique dangereux et important sur les plans culturel et économique révèlent bien la place du Taal dans l’histoire et la culture des Philippines. Le présent article décrit cette dynamique particulière au volcan Taal. À travers l’étude d’analyses scientifiques et d’anecdotes culturelles et historiques, je tente de décrire et d’analyser les représentations du Taal au fil du temps : en tant que paysage physique, objet d’études scientifiques, et en tant que paysage imaginé, objet de productions culturelles. Cette approche permet de saisir comment les volcans, l’un des types de relief naturel les plus potentiellement destructeurs, tendent à être perçus non seulement comme des sources de danger, mais également comme des catalyseurs de la survie économique et de la production intellectuelle.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".