MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255431475 · doi:10.3917/i2d.154.0056

Données de la recherche : entre discours, réalités et valeur

2015· article· fr· W2255431475 on OpenAlexaff
Renaud Délémontez, Chérifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri

Bibliographic record

VenueI2D - Information données & documents · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des Laurentides
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyMathematicsHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[réflexion] Les données de la recherche sont souvent abordées sous l’angle de la gestion, du stockage et de la conservation. L’enjeu ultime reste le partage et la réutilisation de ces données pour une science plus ouverte. Si les bibliothèques, qui possèdent les atouts pour aider à réaliser cet objectif, y parviennent, elles auront démontré leur valeur dans les redistributions qui se font autour de la science, telle qu’elle se pratique aujourd’hui.

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)0.148
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.385
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 score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1480.385
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.017
Science and technology studies0.0140.052
Scholarly communication0.0450.041
Open science0.0060.021
Research integrity0.0110.018
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 head0.567
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueI2D - Information données & documentsSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207