MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613791048 · doi:10.7202/1039012ar

Modélisation soutenant l’inclusion numérique des personnes présentant une DI ou un TSA

2017· article· fr· W2613791048 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Dany Lussier‐Desrochers, Claude L. Normand, Stéphanie-M. Fecteau, Jeannie Roux, Valérie Godin-Tremblay, Marie‐Ève Dupont, Martin Caouette, Alejandro Romero-Torres, Charles Viau‐Quesnel, Yves Lachapelle, Laurence Pépin-Beauchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelle · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre société numérique offre de nombreux avantages à bon nombre de citoyens. Cependant, les personnes qui présentent une déficience intellectuelle (DI) ou un trouble du spectre de l’autisme (TSA) doivent interagir avec un environnement numérique commun à l’ensemble des citoyens et inadapté à leurs besoins. Cette situation réfère à l’exclusion numérique. Malheureusement, peu de modèles sont disponibles afin de guider les intervenants et les chercheurs sur les moyens à mettre en place pour promouvoir une utilisation efficace et optimale des technologies par ces personnes. Notre équipe a développé une première modélisation des différents enjeux, représentée par une « pyramide d’accessibilité numérique ». En plus de bien identifier les éléments à prendre en compte lors de l’intervention technoclinique, la pyramide offre quelques pistes de solution pour promouvoir l’accessibilité à ces technologies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelleSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207