Les démarches ComMod et Gerdal d'accompagnement de collectifs multi-acteurs pour faciliter l'innovation dans les agro-écosystèmes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les démarches de modélisation d’accompagnement (ComMod) et celles du Groupe d’expérimentation et de recherche : développement et actions localisées (Gerdal) facilitent l’émergence de solutions ou de plans d’action négociés au sein de groupes de pairs ou d’arènes d’acteurs hétérogènes, en stimulant les interactions entre leurs participants. Leurs fondements théoriques, éthiques et méthodologiques sont décrits, et leur usage illustré par deux études de cas. Afin d’aider les praticiens à raisonner leur mode d’intervention auprès de collectifs, l’analyse comparée de ces démarches porte sur des points clés de leur accompagnement, tels que la situation initiale, la construction de collectifs pertinents, l’animation des processus, le partage des savoirs et des points de vue, le suivi et l’évaluation des effets, et le renforcement de la capacité à innover collectivement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".