MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516234345 · doi:10.7202/1033310ar

Les bibliothèques publiques du Québec : pourquoi pas la fierté de nos élus ?

2015· article· fr· W2516234345 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La bibliothèque publique, c’est l’affaire des citoyens mais c’est aussi l’affaire des administrateurs municipaux qui les représentent et que le responsable de la bibliothèque doit convaincre de la nécessité et de l’importance du rôle de cette institution municipale et de sa contribution au dynamisme de la municipalité. Cet article décrit pourquoi et comment le responsable de la bibliothèque doit s’employer à défendre cette vision de la bibliothèque publique.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0100.021
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.316 · 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