MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896638567 · doi:10.7202/1056288ar

RÉFLEXIONS SUR LES LIENS ENTRE NEUROSCIENCES, MATHÉMATIQUES ET ÉDUCATION

2019· article· fr· W2896638567 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gustavo Barallobres

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des concepts et méthodes sont parfois empruntés à d’autres disciplines et utilisés pour élucider certaines problématiques éducatives. Dans le cas de la « neuroéducation », cette dernière semble prétendre au statut de « science mère » dont le but est de fonder une grande part des champs de l’éducation. Tout en étant centré sur la « neurodidactique de mathématiques », cet article analysera certaines thèses explicites ou implicites formulées par la neuroéducation, afin de rendre explicite le fondement théorique qui les soutient et de délimiter la portée de certains résultats en termes d’application à l’enseignement de savoirs scolaires, en particulier les savoirs mathématiques.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.115 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207