MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1487289352 · doi:10.7202/038735ar

Étude sur la puissance statistique des devis de recherche en éducation

2009· article· fr· W1487289352 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Éric Yergeau

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Improvement
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose de faire le point sur la puissance statistique moyenne des devis de recherche en éducation publiés récemment au Canada francophone. Soixante-dix-sept articles publiés entre 2004 et 2006, à l’intérieur de quatre revues scientifiques canadiennes francophones, ont été analysés avec le logicielG*Powerpour déterminer leur capacité à détecter des effets de petite, moyenne et grande taille. Les résultats montrent peu de progrès réels de la recherche en éducation au Canada français en matière de puissance statistique depuis les travaux de Cohen (1962). Des pistes concrètes pour améliorer la puissance statistique des devis sont suggérées.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.249
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.558
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2490.558
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.015
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.783
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicEducational Assessment and ImprovementFrench-language works237,207