Comment enquêter sur une émeute ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En novembre 2005, la France a été touchée par une vague de violences urbaines inédites. Issu d’une enquête monographique menée dans la ville d’Aulnay-sous-Bois (au nord de Paris), cet article souhaite revenir sur le terrain, en mettant en lumière d’une part ses aspérités, en prenant d’autre part très au sérieux la parole des jeunes impliqués, directement ou pas, dans ces évènements. Considérant les interviewés comme « capables » de dire leur expérience (en leur donnant un sens), nous avons fait état de la pluralité des versions que les jeunes ont donné de ces évènements, en formalisant leurs tentatives au travers de trois grandes figures explicatives (l’émeute déviante, l’émeute protestataire et l’émeute ludique). France was affected by an unseen wave of riots in November 2005. This paper comes from a monographic survey made in Aulnay-sous-Bois (a town in the north of Paris). This paper aims to focus on some significant difficulties during the fieldwork. We also attempt to take seriously the discourse of the young interviewees (those actively involved as well as those not actively involved in these events). We have considered our interviewees as “able” to tell their experiences and to give them a meaning. Thanks to this attitude, this survey found out that young people gave several versions of the riots summarised in three great explanations: for them these riots were the result of deviance, protest or a game. En Noviembre de 2005 Francia fue afectada por una oleada de violencia urbana inédita hasta entonces. Fruto de una investigación monográfica realizada en la ciudad de Aulnay-sous-Bois (al norte de París), este artículo desea volver a estos hechos, por un lado para poner de relieve la dificultad de la investigación, y por otro, para dar voz a los jóvenes implicados, directamente o no, en estos acontecimientos. Considerando a los protagonistas sociales “capaces” de contar su experiencia, describimos la pluralidad de versiones que los jóvenes dieron de estos sucesos, creando para ello tres grandes modelos explicativos (la revuelta como desviación, la revuelta como protesta y la revuelta como diversión).
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".