MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146895978 · doi:10.7202/1009259ar

De la liberté du logiciel et de son ouverture : tour d’horizon et perspectives

2012· article· fr· W2146895978 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Guillaume Blum

Bibliographic record

VenueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publique · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, l’auteur présente ce qu’est le logiciel libre et ce qu’il représente. Pour ce faire, il s’intéresse à différents éléments, tels que les concepteurs, les utilisateurs, le mécanisme de fonctionnement et les raisons poussant les individus à recourir à ce type de logiciel. Une fois l’objet défini et bien décrit, il examine les conséquences du logiciel libre dans d’autres domaines et relève les enjeux en matière d’administration publique. La dernière partie revient sur l’état d’avancement du logiciel libre au Québec et dans l’administration publique québécoise.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.035
Scholarly communication0.0160.014
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
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
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publiqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207