MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886068675 · doi:10.4000/bssg.239

À la redécouverte des catalogues d’éditeurs québécois

2018· article· fr· W2886068675 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josée Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueBiens Symboliques / Symbolic Goods · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

n o 2 / 2018 la redcouverte des catalogues d'diteurs qubcois Histoire du livre et bases de donnes bibliographiques Comment est n le projet de base de donnes ? Dveloppe pour rendre compte des phnomnes lis l'crit, tant dans leurs dimensions culturelles qu'conomiques ou politiques, l'histoire du livre a toujours privilgi les approches quantitatives. Les premiers travaux de Daniel Mornet sur Les Origines intellectuelles de la Rvolution franaise (1933), ou de Lucien Febvre et Henri-Jean-Martin sur L'Apparition du livre (1999-1958) traduisaient dj la volont d'apprhender de vastes corpus plutt que de se limiter quelques titres canoniques. Mais l'utilisation de bases de donnes, partir des annes 1990, a littralement transform la discipline en facilitant le traitement quantitatif et en multipliant ses possibilits.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.272 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiens Symboliques / Symbolic GoodsSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207