Travailler ensemble pour mieux (in)former : le partenariat bibliothécaire-professeur dans la promotion de l’intégrité intellectuelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Même si la prévention du plagiat et la promotion de l’intégrité intellectuelle sont des enjeux de première importance pour les enseignants universitaires, le rapport entre compétences informationnelles et plagiat demeure moins connu pour bon nombre d’entre eux. Il serait donc important qu’une stratégie de promotion de l’intégrité intellectuelle inclue la sensibilisation des enseignants aux lacunes informationnelles de leurs étudiants et à l’incidence qu’elles peuvent avoir sur le plagiat. À l’Université McGill, des ateliers portant sur la promotion de l’intégrité intellectuelle servent de point de départ pour amorcer un dialogue entre bibliothécaires et enseignants sur la question des compétences informationnelles des étudiants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".