Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The papers in this Special Issue were selected for development from those presented at the second ACM SIGCHI/SIGCAPH conference on Computers and Universal Usability, CUU 2003, held in Vancouver in November 2003. and follows the first Special Issue on Universal Usability (Interacting with Computers 14, 2002). In the early days of computers, the concept of ‘universal access’ would have been meaningless. Computers were few in number, filled air-conditioned rooms and required very special skills and knowledge to operate. The range of applications was correspondingly limited—they might be used to calculated the trajectory of artillery shells or to break secrete ciphers, but they were capable of nothing that would be of any interest to the average person. The first significant change came, of course, with the advent of the personal computer, the PC. The PC was different in many ways. It was small, so that it could be used in an ordinary room. Most likely that room was an office, because although the PC was very much cheaper than its mainframe ancestor, it still cost more than the average person would want to spend. Indeed, they would not want to spend that much because they would see little benefit from owning a computer; the things they could do with it (applications they could run) were limited, and generally orientated to business requirements. There was a persistent force driving the PC market, though: the more PCs were sold, the greater numbers were manufactured and the more were built the cheaper they became. As they became cheaper there was a need to sell them, to maintain the momentum. So manufacturers had to find and to create new markets.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle