MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806319485 · doi:10.17118/11143/12330

L'éternel conflit entre les graphologues et grapho-analystes et les spécialistes en écritures

2002· article· fr· W2806319485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
André Münch

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de droit Université de Sherbrooke · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis des décennies, les spécialistes ou experts en écritures et signatures sont fréquemment en conflit avec de nombreux graphologues ou grapho-analystes et, selon l’auteur, ce problème serait principalement dû à un manque de formation de base des graphologues ou grapho-analystes dans le domaine spécifique de l’expertise d’écritures et de signatures à des fins judiciaires. Après plus de trente ans d’expérience dans le domaine sur le continent nord-américain, M. André Münch nous propose de partager ses réflexions personnelles relatives au conflit qui existe toujours entre la graphologie et l’expertise d’écritures et il suggère quelques solutions pour tenter d’améliorer la situation existante.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de droit Université de SherbrookeSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207