Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le programme de sciences humaines au cégep draine le plus grand nombre de diplômés du secondaire et d'étudiants qui changent d'orientation en cours d'études collégiales. Les dossiers d'admission y sont de qualité nettement inférieure et le taux de diplômation beaucoup plus faible que chez les étudiants du programme de sciences. Bien qu'un même DEC en sciences humaines couronne des agencements de cours fort variables, on peut distinguer trois grandes catégories d'étudiants: ceux d'administration, qui sous plusieurs rapports se classent bons deuxièmes derrière l'élite du programme de sciences ; ceux des profils avec mathématiques, qui présentent des dossiers scolaires plus faibles; ceux des profils sans mathématiques, caractérisés par des carences académiques qui semblent aller en s'aggravant. Les données de l'étude concernent les vingt-trois cégeps affiliés au Service régional des admissions du Montréal métropolitain.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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.
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".