MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915538082 · doi:10.7202/1054357ar

La langue de la publication scientifique : la prépondérance de l’anglais et la recherche

2018· article· fr· W2915538082 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hubert Fondin

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article étudie les problèmes actuels que pose la prépondérance de la langue anglaise comme véhicule linguistique de la production scientifique dans le monde. Devant la croissance du nombre des publications et le quasi-monopole linguistique détenu par les pays anglo-saxons, lequel se manifeste par la qualité de leurs revues et par une large politique de traductions, l’attitude des chercheurs des autres pays oscille entre l’acceptation de ce fait comme facteur d’une efficacité garantie et la recherche de compromis qui permettraient le maintien d’une littérature en d’autres langues, notamment en français.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207