MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915965210 · doi:10.7202/1055292ar

Les périodiques en bibliothéconomie : revues scientifiques et bulletins d’information

2019· article· fr· W2915965210 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marcel Lajeunesse

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peu d’études valables ont porté sur la presse périodique en bibliothéconomie. Il existe néanmoins quelques essais de typologie pour les périodiques de cette discipline et des caractéristiques reconnues qui font qu’une revue puisse être dite scientifique. À la lumière de la théorie existante sur le sujet, l’auteur examine les périodiques québécois en bibliothéconomie.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0610.085
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.002

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 head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationFrench-language works237,207