MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785751008 · doi:10.4000/books.pum.5981

7. Les méthodes mixtes

2012· book-chapter· fr· W2785751008 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Pluye

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive and psychological constructs research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les méthodes mixtes consistent à intégrer des méthodes qualitatives et quantitatives dans une évaluation ou une recherche. La démarche suppose de réfléchir à cette intégration à toutes les étapes du projet, de la formulation des questions de recherche à l’analyse des données, en passant par la revue de littérature. Les méthodes mixtes permettent un apport descriptif, explicatif ou prédictif supérieur à ceux des méthodes qualitatives ou quantitatives prises séparément.

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)0.152
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.286
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1520.286
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.021

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooksSame topicCognitive and psychological constructs researchFrench-language works237,207