Faire cause commune avec ou sans les acteurs économiques? Défiance et faux-semblants dans la déclinaison territoriale de la réforme du modèle français d’organisation du sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reform of the French sports model launched in 2019 organizes collegiality between the players involved in the development of sporting activities. Representatives of the French government, local authorities, the sporting movement and the business world now sit on consultative bodies such as the Agence Nationale du Sport and the Conférences Régionales du Sport, to devise a form of governance that serves the general interest. As this opening-up to participation is the first time that it has been extended to commercial players, a study was carried out in one region to understand the conditions under which they join this collective undertaking. The results showed that schemes aimed at attracting economic players were hampered by a collective inability to imagine what might arouse their interest in making common cause in the field of sport. The fixed representations of the values that drive them and the roles they are expected to play help to keep them on the margins of a governance system controlled by public players and associations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".