Chapitre 3 - La recherche agronomique et l’innovation : essai d’analyse sociohistorique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. Ce chapitre contribue à questionner, dans une perspective sociohistorique, la place qu’occupe la thématique de l’innovation dans le champ de la recherche agronomique. Si la notion d’innovation est aujourd’hui omniprésente, l’idée que les sciences et techniques puissent, et doivent, contribuer à la transformation des mondes agricoles est ancienne. Elle est même fondatrice de la création des institutions nationales et internationales de recherche agronomique qui ont vu le jour pendant la seconde moitié du xxe siècle. Ces dernières décennies, la transformation des relations entre science, agriculture et société est venue néanmoins questionner cette contribution. Face, notamment, aux crises de confiance envers le modèle agricole industriel et aux évolutions propres au champ scientifique, les horizons souhaitables pour les mondes agricoles ont évolué, et se sont diversifiés. Les institutions de recherche agronomique ont été conduites à faire face à ces évolutions, et à réinventer régulièrement les termes de leurs contributions à l’innovation et à la transformation des mondes agricoles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.005 |
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".