Le traitement de l'actualite internationale: avenir... Et mirages de l'information planétaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Doctorante en cotutelle entre l’Universite Paris VIII et l’Universite Laval, Chargee de cours a l’Universite Paris VIII Le champ de l’information a subi ces dix dernieres annees les effets de la globalisation : mutations dans l’industrie des medias, nouvelles pratiques de communication, revolution technique, reconfiguration du systeme economique mondial par la creation de conglomerats mediatiques et multiplication des echanges. Ces phenomenes ont modifie de maniere consequente le paysage international de l’information, les acteurs concernes, mais egalement le traitement et la place accordes a l’information internationale. La globalisation a notamment modifie la notion de « frontieres », impliquant directement une redefinition du concept d’information internationale. En pratique, les medias conjuguent aujourd’hui des logiques territoriales differentes : regionalisation, glocalisation et transnationalisation ou global, international, national, regional et local cohabitent. L’ouvrage anglosaxon Global Transformations1 opere une genealogie de la globalisation. Divisant l’Histoire entre quatre periodes (premodern globalization, early modern globalization, modern globalization and contemporary globalization), les auteurs situent la globalisation actuelle comme la succession de phases de mutation. La globalisation telle qu’on peut la vivre aujourd’hui se caracterise par l’ampleur des moyens de communication et le developpement des transports qui accroissent la rapidite et l’intensite des flux. Le processus de globalisation est d’abord analyse sous l’angle du politique : la globalisation signe-t-elle la fin
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".