MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2059588500 · doi:10.7202/002887ar

Évaluation des définitions d'ouvrages

2002· article· fr· W2059588500 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Véronique Gesché

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent article se penche sur le rôle de la définition et en dresse une typologie des types et des principaux défauts. On expose ensuite les résultats d'un volet de la recherche effectuée en 1993 par le CTB à la demande du ministère des Technologies nouvelles et de l'Emploi de la Région wallonne de Belgique. Enfin, on présente quelques recommandations à l'usage des auteurs de définitions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0150.016
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.528
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteurs→Same topicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts→French-language works237,207→