MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921688166

FERRAMENTAS PARA LETRAMENTO ACADÊMICO

2018· article· pt· W2921688166 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eliane Gouvêa Lousada, Luzia Bueno

Bibliographic record

VenueCIET:EnPED · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Science and Libraries
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta comunicacao visa apresentar e discutir um site proposto a partir de  uma pesquisa em andamento desenvolvida em um projeto internacional « Se former a la redaction de genres academiques, un defi pour les etudiants universitaires » (Formar-se na redacao de generos academicos, um desafio para os estudantes universitarios), envolvendo pesquisadores de universidades do Brasil (USP, USF e UNESP) e do Canada (Universidade de Sherbrooke) e tendo como parte importante de suas discussoes o papel e a implementacao de tecnologias no desenvolvimento do letramento academico de alunos e professores. Este projeto tem como objetivo maior fazer um levantamento do trabalho com o letramento academico nas universidades implicadas, contribuindo tanto para o desenvolvimento das iniciativas ja existentes quanto para a elaboracao de novas acoes a partir de uma troca de experiencias e de conhecimentos. Tres objetivos complementares estao articulados a este projeto: um objetivo de pesquisa, um objetivo de formacao e um objetivo de cooperacao. A fundamentacao teorica esta centrada no Interacionismo sociodiscursivo, nos Novos Estudos do Letramento e no E-learning. Como resultados parciais, ja foi possivel perceber que o site abre um conjunto de possibilidades para o letramento academico de alunos e professores.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0230.009
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.010

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCIET:EnPEDSame topicInformation Science and LibrariesFrench-language works237,207