Appels d'offres et enchères renversées : Résultats d'expériences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce travail fait suite au rapport intitulé « Appels d'offres et enchères ouvertes : Enjeux de design et propositions » rédigé par Y. Richelle, J. Robert et R. Gérin-Lajoie qui, d'une part, met en évidence les problèmes liés à l'utilisation des procédures actuelles et, d'autre part, propose de nouvelles procédures basées sur des enchères cadencées. Dans cette étude, nous présentons les principaux résultats obtenus lors des expériences en laboratoire. Ces expériences cherchent, d'une part, à identifier et mesurer les désavantages des procédures utilisées présentement par le Gouvernement du Québec pour réaliser les appels de soumissions ainsi que les appels d'offres de services et, d'autre part, à mesurer les bénéfices qu'engendrerait l'utilisation d'enchères cadencées appropriées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".