Étude qualitative et comparative sur la portée des relations entre la recherche et la communauté d'entreprises dans les pôles technologiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tant par le degré de participation des agents scientifico-technologiques du milieu local que par les relations avec les entreprises implantées sur les pôles technologiques, la promotion et le développement d’espaces technopolitains sont très diversifiés selon le site et la région. Compte tenu de cette diversité, nous avons entrepris une étude basée sur l’estimation qualitative d’une série de variables concernant le comportement des universités et centres de recherche dans 13 pôles technologiques. Cela nous a permis de conclure que l’intensité scientifique et technique à l’intérieur du pôle et la relation réelle entre les agents de recherche et les entreprises locataires sont les conditions les plus valables pour avancer vers la participation optimale de la communauté scientifico-technologique locale dans tous les domaines de la vie d’un pôle d’entreprises de haute technologie.
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 | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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.
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".