L’impact de la mutation de l’informatique documentaire au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’évolution de l’informatique documentaire au Québec, très peu différente de celle observée au Canada et aux États-Unis, a toutefois suivi l’évolution technologique de la province. Sans être la seule innovation technique de ces dernières années, elle constitue le facteur commun qui a permis une mutation des services documentaires et accéléré l’émergence d’une nouvelle philosophie de l’information. La technologie informatique a subi des changements rapides et continuels lors de la dernière décennie et son implantation a eu des impacts certains sur les ressources humaines, financières et, en définitive, sur les services offerts. Mais cette évolution fut effectuée de façon douloureuse et très morcelée. Elle s’est faite malgré l’absence d’assises et de structure de base pouvant la soutenir à différents niveaux. Malgré tout, la poursuite de la mutation de l’informatique documentaire doit s’inscrire dans le contexte de l’évolution nationale et internationale.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".