MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014190070 · doi:10.4000/itineraires.2276

Écriveuses du Web : abondance et remix

2015· article· fr· W2014190070 on OpenAlexaff
Paule Mackrous

Bibliographic record

VenueItinéraires · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’expression « écriveuses du Web » désigne ces femmes qui s’approprient avec courage et audace les espaces en ligne pour faire du Web leur territoire. Nous avons identifié deux notions permettant de problématiser leur pratique : l’abondance et le remix. Écrire sur le Web, c’est participer à l’abondance numérique, c’est-à-dire s’inscrire dans l’afflux de productions en ligne. Pour cela, les écriveuses trouvent des stratégies pour se connecter aux autres. Elles écrivent également pour garder le flux de leur créativité actif afin que leurs idées soient abondantes. Elles utilisent les écritures médiatiques qui, parfois, engendrent des remix. Ces derniers sont générés à partir d’une ou plusieurs autres productions culturelles et peuvent aussi s’appliquer à l’identité des écriveuses, qu’elles remixent afin d’explorer des formes d’écriture singulières.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.047 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueItinérairesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207