MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257560390 · doi:10.29173/cais11

Vers des systèmes de découverte et de filtrage d'information documentaire : quelle stratégie faut-il mettre en place?

2013· article· fr· W2257560390 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurence Favier, Madjid Ihadjadène

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Data Mining and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le problème de l'exploitation de grands gisements d'information, celle de bases de données du type "datawarehouse" dont la constitution se généralise, de catalogues informatisés (OPACs) de bibliothèques, de bases de données spécialisées, d'Internet (en particulier du Web) est l'impossibilité pour l'usager de visualiser l'ensemble des réponses que les systèmes de recherche…

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0370.050
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.010

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicWeb Data Mining and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207