Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les discours de référence sur la langue française sont des prises de position émanant des instances officielles, des spécialistes (linguistes et grammairiens) ou de personnalités publiques reconnues comme tels, mais aussi des médias, qui jouent un rôle non négligeable dans la diffusion des normes. Ces discours, même s’ils peuvent être remis en question, constituent néanmoins pour les francophones des repères souvent symboliques et des avis difficilement contournables. Anne Dister et Sophie Piron collaborent depuis de nombreuses années. Elles ont organisé deux colloques, à Montréal et à Bruxelles, consacrés aux discours de référence sur la langue française. La présente publication regroupe des articles qui sont, pour certains, issus de communications présentées lors de ces colloques, pour d’autres originaux. Contributeurs : Anne-Sophie Bally, Christophe Benzitoun, Hélène Cajolet-Laganière, Marie-Hélène Côté, Émilie Deschellette, Caroline Dubois, Romain « Monté » Filstroff, Caroline Lachet, Franz Meier, Marie-Louise Moreau, Malo Morvan, Claudine Nicolas, Sophie Piron, Wim Remysen, Amélie-Hélène Rheault, Audrey Roig, Sofia Stratilaki-Klein, Stefano Vicari, Nadine Vincent et Anne-Christel Zeiter.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.540 | 0.329 |
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".