Bibliographic record
Abstract
Notre hypothèse de départ dans cette étude était que les résultats d’une recherche développée en partenariat seraient plus adaptés aux besoins des divers acteurs impliqués que ceux découlant d’une recherche plus « classique » et qu’il en résulterait nécessairement des retombées plus nombreuses dans les milieux des partenaires impliqués. Au terme de notre analyse, nous constatons que l’hypothèse initiale n’a pu être confirmée que partiellement. Le modèle de la Traduction développé par Callon et al. (2001), permet de cerner les limites de cette approche dans le contexte étudié. Ce qui semble avoir invalidé notre hypothèse de départ tient en partie aux « mesures de précaution » mises en œuvre par les partenaires lors de la mise à l’épreuve des connaissances nouvelles mais aussi le retour aux anciens modes de fonctionnement entre intervenants et chercheurs.
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 | 0.023 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".