MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158380014 · doi:10.7202/1013780ar

L’audit de la gouvernance : au service d’une plus grande transparence

2013· article· fr· W2158380014 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Normand Ouellet

Bibliographic record

VenueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publique · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceAuditHumanitiesBusinessArtAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article met en lumière les différents enjeux qui font en sorte que l’audit gouvernemental, ou de la gouvernance, pourrait être appelé à revêtir de plus en plus d’importance compte tenu de l’engagement clair pour un gouvernement plus transparent et du vecteur de changement sans précédent que constitue le développement exponentiel des moyens inter- actifs de communication. Il propose une réflexion prospective sur l’évolution de la fonction d’audit gouvernemental dans le contexte d’une plus grande ouverture des gouvernements à la participation et à la collaboration des citoyens.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.011
Scholarly communication0.0170.011
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publiqueSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207