Notice bibliographique
Résumé
07–259Abasi, Ali R., Nahal Akbari & Barbara Graves (U Ottawa, Canada), Discourse appropriation, construction of identities, and the complex issue of plagiarism: ESL students writing in graduate school. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.2 (2006), 102–117. 07–260Brantmeier, Cindy (Washington U, St Louis, USA), Toward a multicomponent model of interest and L2 reading: Sources of interest, perceived situational interest, and comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language (U Hawaii, USA) 18.2 (2006), 89–115. 07–261Bremner, Stephen (City U Hong Kong, China), Politeness, power, and activity systems: Written requests and multiple audiences in an institutional setting. Written Communication (Sage) 23.4 (2006), 397–423. 07–262Cargill, Margaret (U Adelaide, Australia) & Patrick O'Connor, Developing Chinese scientists' skills for publishing in English: Evaluating collaborating-colleague workshops based on genre analysis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes (Elsevier) 5.3 (2006), 207–221. 07–263Edge, Julian, Reading to take notes and to summarize: A classroom procedure (reprint of author's 1983 article). Reading in a Foreign Language (U Hawaii, USA), 1.2, 93–98. 07–264Edge, Julian (Manchester U, UK; julian.edge@manchester.ac.uk ), From paragraphs to patterns: Ablocutionary value in autobiography. Reading in a Foreign Language (U Hawaii, USA) 18.2 (2006), 124–127. 07–265Goetry, Vincent, Lesly Wade-Woolley, Régine Kolinsky & Philıppe Mousty (Queen's U, Belgium; vgoetry@ulb.ac.be ), The role of stress processing abilities in the development of bilingual reading. Journal of Research in Reading (Blackwell) 29.3 (2006), 349–362. 07–266Huang, Shu-Chen (National Chiao Tung U, Hsinchu, China; sjh241@yahoo.com.tw ), Reading English for academic purposes – What situational factors may motivate learners to read?System (Elsevier) 34.3 (2006), 371–383. 07–267Huang, Shu-Chen, Yuh-Show Cheng & Chiou-Lan Chern (National Chiao Tung U, Hsinchu, Taiwan; sjh241@yahoo.com.tw ), Pre-reading materials from subject matter texts – Learner choices and the underlying learner characteristics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes (Elsevier) 5.3 (2006), 193–206. 07–268Hui-Tzu Min (National Cheng Kung U, Tainan, Taiwan), The effects of trained peer review on EFL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.2 (2006), 118–141. 07–269Ikeda, Makiko (Himeji Dokkyo U, Japan; maikoike@wonder.ocn.ne.jp ) & Takeuchi, Osamu, Clarifying the differences in learning EFL reading strategies: An analysis of portfolios. System (Elsevier) 34.3 (2006), 384–398. 07–270Juzwik, Mary M. (Michigan State U, East Lansing, USA, mmjuzwik@msu.edu ), Svjetlana Curcic, Kimberly Wolbers, Kathleen D. Moxley, Lisa M. Dimling & Rebecca K. Shankland, Writing into the 21st century: An overview of research on writing, 1999 to 2004. Written Communication (Sage) 23.4 (2006), 452–476. 07–271Ma, Jee Hyun (U Hawaii, USA; jeehyun@hawaii.edu ), Just taking notes is not enough. Reading in a Foreign Language (U Hawaii, USA) 18.2 (2006), 128–130. 07–272Orsolini, Margherita (Università degli Studi di Roma ‘La Sapienza’; margherita.orsolini@uniroma1.it ), Rachele Fanari, Valeria Tosi, Barbara De Nigris & Roberto Carrieri, From phonological recoding to lexical reading: A longitudinal study on reading development in Italian. Language and Cognitive Processes (Routledge/Taylor & Francis) 21.5 (2006), 576–607. 07–273Pretorious, Elizabeth (U South Africa, South Africa; pretoej@unisa.ac.za ), The comprehension of logical relations in expository texts by students who study through the medium of ESL. System (Elsevier) 34.3 (2006), 432–450. 07–274Rogers, Rebecca & Melissa Mosley, Racial literacy in a second-grade classroom: Critical race theory, whiteness studies, and literacy research. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.4 (2006), 462–495. 07–275Ross, Nigel (Institute for Interpreters and Translators, Milan, Italy), Writing in the Information Age. English Today (Cambridge University Press) 22.3 (2006), 47–50. 07–276Schwanenflugel, Paula J., Elizabeth B. Meisinger, Joseph M. Wisenbaker, M. R. Kuhn, Gregory P. Strauss & Robin D. Morris, Becoming a fluent and automatic reader in the early elementary school years. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.4 (2006), 496–522. 07–277Starfield, Sue & Louise J. Ravelli (U New South Wales, Sydney, Australia), ‘The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist’: Self and structure inNew Humanitiesresearch theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes (Elsevier) 5.3 (2006), 222–243. 07–278Tardy, Christine M. (DePaul U, Chicago, USA), Researching first and second language genre learning: A comparative review and a look ahead. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.2 (2006), 79–101. 07–279Weber, Rose-Marıe (State U New York, USA; rweber@albany.edu ), Function words in the prosody of fluent reading. Journal of Research in Reading (Blackwell) 29.3 (2006), 258–269. 07–280Wood, Clare (Coventry U, UK; c.wood@coventry.ac.uk ), Metrical stress sensitivity in young children and its relationship to phonological awareness and reading. Journal of Research in Reading (Blackwell) 29.3 (2006), 270–287. 07–281Ziegler, Johannes C. & Usha Goswami (U Cambridge, UK; ucg10@cam.ac.uk ), Becoming literate in different languages: Similar problems, different solutions. Developmental Science (Blackwell) 9.5 (2006), 429–436.
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 | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,686 | 0,716 |
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 ».