MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802646714 · doi:10.3917/comla1.195.0007

Habiter la bibliothèque – pratiques d’étude, entretien d’un milieu

2018· article· fr· W2802646714 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Dehail, Joëlle Le Marec

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication & langages · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En se fondant sur les résultats d’une enquête réalisée dans le Haut-de-Jardin de la Bibliothèque nationale de France, cet article propose une analyse de la bibliothèque comme un espace habité qui abrite un ensemble dense de pratiques d’étude créatives, discrètes et pleinement assumées par les lecteurs. Les discours et représentations des promoteurs d’une mutation des bibliothèques destinées à en gérer la modernisation témoignent d’une méconnaissance de ce qui s’y vit quotidiennement.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication & langagesSame topicDiverse Cultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207