MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168552894 · doi:10.7202/1018846ar

Les bibliothèques numériques sont-elles solubles dans le Web sémantique ?

2013· article· fr· W2168552894 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michel Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Web sémantique, et plus particulièrement le réseau Linked Open Data, est appelé à transformer radicalement la manière dont les bibliothèques numériques rendent accessibles leurs documents et les métadonnées sur ceux-ci. Dans cet article, après une brève présentation des principales technologies du Web sémantique, et plus particulièrement du modèle de données RDF sur lequel il repose, nous montrons comment les bibliothèques numériques peuvent s’intégrer au réseau Linked Open Data. Puis nous abordons le problème crucial de l’extraction, à partir de contenus textuels, des métadonnées nécessaires à cette intégration.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0200.038
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207