Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Readers, After publishing our beloved journal for nearly ten years, the time has come for us to publish a final issue of the Deakin Review in its current form. We hope it will enjoy a second life at a later date under the auspices of another group at the University of Alberta. On behalf of the editorial team, I would like to thank all of our book reviewers for their hard work and dedication. Your reviews were always a joy to read and were it not for your invaluable contributions, the journal would not have been a success for so many years. It’s amazing to think that our large team of reviewers included people united not only by their keen interest in children’s books but also by family bonds. Indeed, we regularly received reviews from people who are related to each other, like Kirk MacLeod and his daughters Lorisia and Kaia MacLeod, who all share a wonderfully infectious enthusiasm for children’s literature and libraries. We also benefited from the support of prolific reviewers like Leslie Aitken and Sandy Campbell. Remarkably, since our very first issue, Sandy introduced many new librarians, family members, and others who have a love of childrens' books to review for the Deakin Review. Fortunately, our journal always benefited from the support of a highly capable team of editors. Accordingly, I would like to thank my fellow editors, Kim Frail, Debbie Feisst, Janice Kung, and Denis Lacroix, for volunteering their services so generously. They always carried out their work with tremendous enthusiasm and collegiality. I am also grateful to all of our former editors, including David Sulz, Hanne Pearce, Allison Sivak, and Cam Laforest, for their help and encouragement. Over the years, I had opportunities to interview some fascinating authors who shared wonderful insights about their work for the enjoyment of our readership. Our journal also benefited greatly from the contributions of colleagues like Lynne Wiltse and Joanne de Groot who gave their students opportunities to write reviews of contemporary children’s books and have them published in the Deakin Review. Other UofA colleagues wrote guest editorials and reviews for special issues. In one of our special issues, we were proud to partner with teachers from Ben Calf Robe - St. Clare Elementary/Junior High School who asked their students to submit book reviews for a class assignment during READ IN Week. Thanks are due as well to our namesake, Dr Andrea Deakin, who has been an inspiration to us all for her lifelong enthusiasm for children’s stories. I am grateful to Margaret Law for introducing me to Andrea so many years ago. I reserve special thanks for you, our devoted readers, for taking a lively interest in our journal and the books we reviewed. I sincerely hope that your passion for children’s books continues to flourish and grow. Please take good care of yourselves, especially during these trying times, and may you always draw comfort from good books, family, and friendships. All the best, Robert Desmarais, Managing Editor
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,571 | 0,455 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».