MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987684585 · doi:10.4000/ocim.272

Le Jardin des Explorateurs

2008· article· fr· W1987684585 on OpenAlexaffabout
Johanne Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueLa Lettre de l’OCIM · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsEspace pour la vie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Jardin botanique et l'Insectarium de Montréal font partie, avec le Biodôme et le Planétarium de Montréal, des Muséums nature de Montréal.Le Jardin botanique de Montréal a été réalisé en 1931 et accueille annuellement 900 000 visiteurs, dont 65 000 enfants en visite scolaire.L'Insectarium de Montréal est établi sur le site du Jardin botanique depuis 1990 et accueille à lui seul 350 000 visiteurs par année.Les Muséums nature ont pour mission de faire connaître la nature et les savoirs qui s'y rattachent, de contribuer à l'étude et à la préservation de la biodiversité et de promouvoir des comportements responsables face à l'environnement.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.022

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLa Lettre de l’OCIMSame topicAnimal and Plant Science EducationFrench-language works237,207