MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1585587881 · doi:10.1353/cja.2004.0017

J.D. Webster and B.K. Haight (Eds.). Critical Advances in Reminiscence Work: From Theory to Application. New York: Springer 2002.

2004· article· fr· W1585587881 on OpenAlexaff
Habib Chaudhury

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ Cet ouvrage collectif résume les progrès réalisés depuis quinze ans dans l'étude et la compréhension de la réminiscence, un domaine qui se situe au carrefour de nombreuses disciplines. Le livre comporte cinq sections et vingt chapitres allant de questions conceptuelles à des problèmes d'application. Dans la première section, Hendrix et Haight font le point sur les connaissances actuelles en matière de réminiscence et sur la documentation connexe. La seconde section aborde les questions conceptuelles, tandis que la troisième section étudie le développement et l'aspect socio-culturel de la réminiscence. La section suivante concern la recherche sur la réminiscence appliquée à certaines populations. Les chapitres formant la dernière section traitent de l'application clinique des travaux sur la réminiscence. Cet ouvrage enrichira le champ de la recherche sur la réminiscence et la grande variété d'essais qu'il contient sera très utile aux chercheurs, universitaires, cliniciens et historiens, qui s'intéressent à la réminiscence, à l'autobiographie guidée, à l'histoire orale et aux techniques narratives.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.008

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicDigital Storytelling and EducationFrench-language works237,207