Le portail institutionnel Persée à l’épreuve des usages : croiser les approches méthodologiques en Sciences Humaines pour améliorer le partage de connaissances scientifiques en libre accès
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les recherches antérieures spécifiques menées par 4 enseignants-chercheurs en Sciences de l’Information et en Sémiotique trouvent un terrain de convergences dans une étude des usages du portail institutionnel Persée. Ergonomie visuelle, organisation documentaire hypertextuelle, sémiotique du dispositif et communication instrumentée constituent autant des aspects saillants par lesquels l’étude est menée et qui accompagnent la mise en œuvre de la nouvelle version du portail. The specific previous studies conducted by 4 teacher-searchers in Information Science and Semiotics find a convergence ground with a study on uses of the institutional portal Persée. Visual ergonomics, hypertext organization, disposition of the semiotics and instrumental communication are the key aspects of this study and form the base of the implementation of the portal new version.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Scholarly communicationOpen science Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | medium |
| gpt | Scholarly communicationOpen science Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | low |
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 | 0.037 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".