Représentation cartographique des complexités d’un dialogue en ligne. Une technique de modélisation analytique inductive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La plate-forme de dialogue électronique e-dialogue constitue un espace de discussion interdisciplinaire et transdisciplinaire qui promeut un partage et un transfert de connaissances. Elle a été élaborée en 2001 dans le but d’explorer le potentiel d’Internet pour mobiliser divers groupes et réunir une multitude de points de vue afin qu’un dialogue de fond puisse avoir lieu. La plate-forme en question est un système de conversations textuelles en ligne. À l’aide de la Technique Newell & Dale de Modélisation des Conversations (TNDMC), nous avons analysé plus de 45 dialogues en ligne, de 2001 à 2013. Les dialogues ont porté sur des sujets tels que l’infrastructure urbaine, la gestion des déchets nucléaires, l’économie verte – y compris le rôle des jeunes relativement aux initiatives portant sur la durabilité –, les innovations en matière de changement climatique, la redéfinition de la croissance et du progrès dans les temps modernes, et d’autres sujets portant sur les mesures à prendre pour favoriser un avenir durable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".