Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobilisant le cadre propre à la Belgique ainsi que les enjeux internationaux, le cas empirique de la lutte contre le sida est ici problématisé selon une perspective mettant en lumière toute l’historicité du bien commun. En rupture avec une conception substantialiste, l’hypothèse privilégiée dans cet article part d’une conception constructiviste où le bien commun, d’une part, s’élabore à partir d’une pluralité de modèles de démocratie (libéral, représentatif, opinion, expert et participatif) et, d’autre part, se costructure à partir des transactions entre logiques associatives, regards médicaux et action publique. Mais, dans un contexte où le travail de la modernité donne à voir un « polythéisme des valeurs », cette contribution souligne aussi l’importance des procédures et des institutions politiques comme autant de dispositifs organisant la mise en débat et la coordination des prismes au travers desquels se définit le bien commun dans un contexte donné.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".