Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le vocabulaire de l’hospitalité est massivement employé dans la « philosophie publique » française républicaine (Laborde, 2008) pour penser les questions d’immigration, au point qu’on a pu considérer qu’il s’est constitué en « nouveau paradigme » au cours des années 1990 (Rosello, 2001). Or si le phénomène de l’immigration est distinctement sociopolitique, le concept d’hospitalité relève plutôt d’une théorie éthique et son statut dans les discours est celui d’une métaphore (Rosello, 2001). L’hypothèse explorée dans l’article est que son usage est un symptôme de la conversion, systématiquement accomplie par le républicanisme, des principes politiques de justice en obligations éthiques lorsqu’il est question de migrations. L’article suggère qu’il importe de « déséthiciser » les questions de migrations afin de les traiter politiquement : cela doit nous conduire à abandonner la métaphore de l’hospitalité pour traiter les conditions de la citoyenneté.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".