MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1938027628 · doi:10.7202/1025812ar

Pourquoi faire simple quand on peut faire compliqué ?

2014· article· fr· W1938027628 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aurélie Helmlinger

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse multidisciplinary academic research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesRationalisationArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comment un instrument de musique à l’ergonomie aussi difficile que ledouble tenor pana-t-il pu se diffuser aussi largement dans lessteelbands, ces orchestres de métallophones de Trinidad et Tobago, alors que l’évolution topologique des autres instruments tendait au contraire vers la rationalisation ? On tentera d’abord de comprendre ce qui rend cet instrument cognitivement si coûteux, puis on analysera ce qui a fait son succès. On verra notamment que le parcours de son concepteur, Bertie Marshall, est essentiel dans la construction des représentations à son égard.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.030
Scholarly communication0.0130.019
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.431
GPT teacher head0.616
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicDiverse multidisciplinary academic researchFrench-language works237,207