Langue de publication des politologues francophones du Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cette étude présente les résultats d'un sondage réalisé auprès des politologues francophones du Canada portant sur la langue de diffusion des connaissances en science politique. Même si la quasi-totalité des politologues francophones est d'accord avec l’énoncé voulant que l'anglais soit devenu la lingua franca de la science politique, le français continue à occuper une place importante dans la diffusion des connaissances. Toutefois, il existe plusieurs variations en fonction de la langue dans laquelle la thèse de doctorat a été rédigée, du sous-champ disciplinaire dans lequel s'inscrivent les travaux et du rang professoral. Les choix linguistiques sont largement motivés par la volonté de rejoindre le plus vaste auditoire possible tout en obtenant la reconnaissance auprès des pairs.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 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".