Les thèmes de l’Observatoire québécois du loisir pour l’année 2008-2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’Observatoire quebecois du loisir entame sa sixieme annee, fort d’une experience, d’une infrastructure et d’un reseau de partenaires bâtis au cours des cinq dernieres annees et, surtout, d’une connaissance du milieu a servir acquise par une frequentation reguliere. Cette annee, l’Observatoire ne peut negliger les retombees du Congres mondial du loisir qui apparaitra sans doute comme une etape marquante de l’evolution du loisir au Quebec dans la mesure ou nous saurons en exploiter toute la substance. Le present bulletin justifie et presente les themes qui feront l’objet de ses travaux et de ses publications. Ces themes s’alignent sur les tendances et les enjeux actuellement a l’agenda des organisations de loisir du Quebec presentes au Congres mondial du loisir. Les comportements de la population, ceux de la societe civile et les chantiers en cours dans les organisations de loisir du Quebec constituent la toile de fond des travaux de l’Observatoire.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".