MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1571393330

Comités et codes d’éthique en anthropologie : garantie ou contrainte ?

2007· article· fr· W1571393330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aleksandra Cimpric

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal des anthropologues · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le 16 mars 2007, la conference « Comites et codes d’ethique en anthropologie : Garantie ou contrainte ? » organisee par l’Association francaise des anthropologues et presentee a la MMSH par Will C. Van der Hoonard (departement de Sociologie de l’universite de New Brunswick au Canada) avait pour finalite de poser un questionnement sur la pertinence des normes ethiques en sciences sociales. Ces normes ethiques furent definies par trois organisations fondatrices : Institut de recherche en sante ...

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)0.133
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.227
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1330.227
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.012
Science and technology studies0.0110.081
Scholarly communication0.0250.024
Open science0.0050.015
Research integrity0.0120.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.390 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal des anthropologuesSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207