MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2225610241 · doi:10.58079/ouvz

Blogues de Sciences Francophones ?

2014· article· fr· W2225610241 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arthur Charpentier

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAXA Research Fund
KeywordsHumanitiesAnecdotePhilosophyArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allez, je me lance... je vais rompre avec la règle d'or que connaît tout chercheur vivant dans le monde académique : ne jamais parler de ses échecs. Il est en effet de bon ton de dire "j'ai un financement du NSERC" mais pas de dire "sur mes cinq demandes de financement, toutes ont été rejetées. Sauf Une." On peut raconter une anecdote sur les papiers rejetés, autour d'un café, mais mieux vaut éviter de dire qu'on a eu plus de lettres de rejet que de lettres d'acceptation dans sa boîte de mes...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1100.018

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)→Same topicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts→French-language works237,207→