La littérature grise : usage et besoins des enseignants-chercheurs de l’Université Mentouri Constantine (2e partie)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur analyse la pratique de citation et d’usage des para-publications par les enseignants-chercheurs de l’Université Mentouri Constantine révélée grâce à une enquête incluant questionnaire et entretien. L’enquête, menée auprès d’un échantillon représentatif, révèle que la littérature grise est un concept méconnu, que les travaux universitaires (mémoires, thèses), les communications à un congrès, les rapports de recherche et les polycopies sont les para-publications les plus citées et les plus utilisées. De même Internet a provoqué un changement dans le processus de communication scientifique en amplifiant l’information informelle, source d’information privilégiée de la plupart des interviewés. Les propositions envisagées par les répondants pour favoriser l’accès aux para-publications et leur usage marquent une prise de conscience de leur importance dans la recherche universitaire et dans la mise à jour des connaissances scientifiques.
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 | 0.016 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.005 |
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.
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".