Le monde vu par les étudiants de Sfax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The retrospective analysis of the 2009 international survey of the mental map of the world of Sfax's (Tunisia) undergraduate students is high interesting, both empirically and methodologically. Looking back, are the Tunisian students' mental maps unique in any way as compared to other countries surveyed? This has become more pertinent knowing that the Arab Spring would take place only two years later. In answer to the question concerning where students would like to live in the near future, the Tunisian answers display a singular focus on neighboring countries. This highly localized mental map can be partially explained by their lack of international experiences in terms of mobility and the mastery of foreign languages. Nevertheless, by applying a new analytical method of “spatial strings”, we can observe sharp internal divisions between students. One group displays a world map that can be qualified as western and oriented towards the North (the Mediterranean basin, Western Europe, and North America). Despite the problems involved, this group shows a clear focus with many positive quotes concerning countries such as France, Germany, or Canada. A second group possesses a more Eastern mental map, linked to cultural identity; one which rejects the West, considered responsible for the majority of problems (emigration, colonization, islamophoby, etc.).
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".