MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119111309 · doi:10.7202/603128ar

Analyse de l’intelligibilité de textes prescriptifs

2009· article· fr· W2119111309 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Clémence Préfontaine, Jacques Lecavalier

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsCollège de ValleyfieldUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’intelligibilité des textes, telle que nous la définissons, tient compte de l’ensemble des composantes qui en assure la compréhension complète. Nous ne nous limitons pas à considérer les aspects microstructurels (nombre de mots, de phrases, etc.) comme le font les mesures de lisibilité traditionnelles; nous tenons également compte des aspects macrostructurels, ceux qui marquent la progression du texte. Nous présentons ici un instrument qui permet de mesurer cette intelligibilité. Nous l’avons appliqué à des textes prescriptifs (un document bancaire et un document administratif) qui causaient des difficultés de compréhension.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de linguistiqueSame topicText Readability and SimplificationFrench-language works237,207