MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901294952 · doi:10.1522/revueot.v13n2.699

Jacques de Courson Les élus locaux : qui sont-ils ? Que ont-ils ? Comment travaillent-ils ? Paris, Éditions d’organisation, 2001, 215 p.

2004· article· fr· W2901294952 on OpenAlexaffvenue
André Joyal

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Organisations & territoires · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

tibilité de différents modes de coordination entre acteurs géographiquement rapprochés.Pour la rendre opérationnelle, il est bien indiqué qu'il importe d'obtenir, de la part des acteurs concernés, la mise en synergie de leurs trajectoires respectives de façon à favoriser l'émergence de l'intérêt commun.Chacun des chapitres comprend des encadrés facilitant la mise en évidence d'exemples concrets.La technopole de Lyon-Guerland et le site de Lacq en Aquitaine servent ici d'illustrations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.016
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRevue Organisations & territoiresSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207