MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965669858 · doi:10.7202/038495ar

Trois mesures du vocabulaire chez des élèves d’écoles françaises du Nouveau-Brunswick

2009· article· fr· W1965669858 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
François Vigneau

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La mesure du vocabulaire des jeunes néo-brunswickois se heurte à la rareté des tests disposant de normes adaptées et de données psychométriques actuelles. Trois tests de vocabulaire se prêtant bien à une utilisation individuelle ou de groupe sont analysés dans la présente étude : le test de vocabulaire Binois-Pichot (1959), le sous-test vocabulaire du Test collectif d’intelligence générale (Lavoie et Laurendeau, 1960) et le test de vocabulaire Mill Hill (Deltour, 1993). Trois échantillons d’élèves de la quatrième à la huitième année d’écoles françaises du Nouveau-Brunswick ont été examinés à l’aide de l’un de ces trois tests de vocabulaire. Les qualités métrologiques ainsi que des données normatives préliminaires sont rapportées pour chacun des trois instruments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicScience Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207