MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285813628

La diversité culturelle dans les accords commerciaux : vers une nouvelle approche ?

2014· article· fr· W2285813628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonios Vlassis

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En premier lieu, le numéro de septembre met en lumière le texte des accords commerciaux du Canada avec l’Union européenne et la Corée du Sud et il analyse la façon dont les négociateurs ont traité des industries culturelles et de la question de la diversité des expressions culturelles. En deuxième lieu, il aborde les enjeux récents des services audiovisuels non-linéaires qui bouleversent les acteurs dans le paysage audiovisuel, ainsi que la nature et les objectifs de l’intervention publique dans le secteur. En troisième lieu, il met l’accent sur la confrontation entre les auteurs/éditeurs et le géant américain de commerce en ligne Amazon qui révèle l’importance de la mise en place de mesures réglementaires dans le domaine des services culturels numériques – tels que le livre électronique - qui représentent l’avenir du secteur. Enfin, Louise Beaudoin, ancienne ministre des Relations internationales et de la Francophonie du Québec et actrice de premier plan dans le processus de la construction de la Convention sur la diversité des expressions culturelles (CDEC) nous explique l’impact des technologies numériques sur la mise en œuvre de la CDEC, montrant la nécessité d’adapter la CDEC aux défis de l’ère numérique.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.020
Scholarly communication0.0250.013
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
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 venueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège)Same topicCorporate Governance and LawFrench-language works237,207