MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021564522 · doi:10.1177/075910630006700104

A propos de l'échantillon. De l'utilité de quelques mises au point

2000· article· en· W2021564522 on OpenAlex
Jacques Hamel

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicQualitative researchSociologySubject (documents)EpistemologyHumanitiesMathematicsPhilosophySocial scienceStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concerning Samples - The Utility of Certain Clarifications. The article concerns qualitative samples and qualitative sampling. The subject is first treated from an historical point of view by looking at the work of the Chicago school of thought and the birth of the qualitative-quantitative opposition. This quarrel over methods is attenuated by distinctions made in this article between: (a) locality and subject of a study; (b) statistical representativeness and sociological (or theoretical) representativeness; (c) descriptive theory and explicative theory. The construction of a qualitative sample can be formulated as a calculation involving explicitly and uniquely defined and regulated operations.

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.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.226 · 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