À l’ère du numérique, où est le magazine? : déambulation et écologie médiatique urbaine du magazine imprimé contemporain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans ce mémoire, je défends l’idée que le magazine contribue à l’aménagement des lieux qui constituent l’espace public urbain et qu’il fait partie intégrante de « textures » (Adams et Jansson, 2012) qui construisent socialement et culturellement les lieux. J’étudie le magazine imprimé comme un objet physique et situé et m’intéresse aux infrastructures qui le rendent visible. Par une écologie médiatique urbaine, je propose d’ériger un pont entre l’objet médiatique « exceptionnel » (Abrahamson, 2007) qu’est le magazine imprimé et ses lieux afin de considérer le magazine autrement que par les analyses de contenu qui ont dominé les études sur le magazine. En déambulant dans les rues de Montréal, je suis allé à la recherche du magazine pour témoigner de sa présence continue à l’ère du numérique.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".