MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W45816768 · doi:10.4000/sociologies.3553

De l’utilité de la réflexion sur l’utilité de la sociologie

2021· article· fr· W45816768 on OpenAlexaff
Jacques Hamel

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologieS · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyEthnologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les sociologues se voient contraints aujourd’hui de répondre à l’épineuse question : à quoi sert la sociologie ? Après avoir rapidement établi l’état des lieux sur le sujet, laissant croire à la « crise » de la discipline, le présent article cherche à y répondre en montrant l’urgence de serrer les rangs à propos de ce qu’est son objet si tant est qu’on associe la sociologie – comme ici – à une connaissance par objet et par concept.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.072
Scholarly communication0.0260.028
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0110.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociologieSSame topicContemporary Sociological Theory and PracticeFrench-language works237,207