MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511515689 · doi:10.7202/1053621ar

La tarification dans les bibliothèques publiques au Québec

2018· article· fr· W2511515689 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Serge Robillard

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Véritable outil de planification et de gestion financière, la tarification doit être considérée comme une philosophie d’action globale à la base du financement des services municipaux. La tarification répond au principe fiscal de la taxation selon le bénéfice reçu : faire payer le contribuable en fonction des services qu’il reçoit. Ce mode de financement atteindra progressivement plusieurs secteurs de l’activité municipale, dont les bibliothèques publiques. La tarification dans les bibliothèques publiques au Québec est imminente. Précédée d’une analyse en profondeur, cette tarification peut s’avérer la formule la plus équitable et la plus efficace sur le plan administratif. Les professionnels des bibliothèques s’impliqueront-ils dans ce phonomène irréversible ?

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.024
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.334 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207