MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615450752 · doi:10.7202/1039733ar

Proposition de désignations de noms communs français pour 11 lépidoptères du Québec

2017· article· fr· W2615450752 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stéphane Le Tirant

Bibliographic record

VenueLe Naturaliste canadien · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCollembola Taxonomy and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsEspace pour la vie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des centaines d’espèces d’insectes du Québec n’ont toujours pas de noms vernaculaires (noms communs) français. Plusieurs sont pourtant abondantes et connues depuis des décennies, voire des siècles. Attribuer un nom commun aux insectes permet de stimuler la connaissance générale du grand public vis-à-vis de ceux-ci et, à plus long terme, de favoriser leur conservation. Les auteurs proposent ici 11 nouveaux noms communs pour des lépidoptères répandus ou très répandus, encore orphelins d’une désignation en français, et répartis au sein de 3 familles (Géométridés, Érébidés et Noctuidés).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLe Naturaliste canadienSame topicCollembola Taxonomy and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207