L’évaluation de l’efficacité de la bibliothèque : cadre théorique et méthodologique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur propose un cadre théorique et méthodologique aux études d’évaluation de l’efficacité des bibliothèques. L’analyse de systèmes, dont les principes sont exposés, constitue l’approche la plus fréquemment retenue dans les études de ce genre en sciences de l’information. Suit la définition de la nature de la microévaluation qui fait appel à des indicateurs d’efficacité pour effectuer une auto-évaluation rigoureuse des résultats, de la qualité des produits et des services documentaires réalisés par une bibliothèque. Vient enfin une analyse critique des philosophies du « collège-bibliothèque » et des « media center », qui n’identifient pas la bibliothèque d’enseignement à un système documentaire.
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 | 0.119 | 0.268 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.026 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".