MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110894853 · doi:10.7202/1014046ar

Le rapport de recherche : un méga-outil pour « nourrir » l’enseignement des sciences

2013· article· fr· W2110894853 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Léonard P. Rivard, Luc N. Martin, Fernand Saurette

Bibliographic record

VenueFrancophonies d Amérique · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Strategies and Epistemologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Saint-Boniface
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le rapport de recherche est le genre de texte dominant de la communauté scientifique. Cependant, tous les enseignants de sciences ne connaissent pas nécessairement ses particularités. Le but de cet article est d’aider ces derniers en examinant les différentes parties qui constituent les rapports de recherche publiés dans les revues savantes. Au cours de l’analyse, nous commenterons les idées que l’auteur développe dans chaque partie (le fond) ainsi que les éléments linguistiques auxquels il a recours (la forme). Nous émettrons finalement des recommandations à l’intention des enseignants qui aimeraient transposer les idées présentées lorsqu’ils exploitent le rapport de laboratoire pour développer davantage l’écrit chez leurs élèves.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.205
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.183 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrancophonies d AmériqueSame topicEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesFrench-language works237,207