MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949086994 · doi:10.3917/rce.023.0161

12. L’économie de la donnée peut-elle se développer contre ses utilisateurs ?

2019· article· fr· W2949086994 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin

Bibliographic record

VenueRegards croisés sur l'économie/Regards croisés sur l'économie · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsNational Capital Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les dernières années ont vu éclore une économie de la donnée, riche en promesses, mais créant dans son sillage, au gré des scandales et failles de sécurité, d’importantes interrogations sur le traitement accordé aux données personnelles. En réponse à la crise de confiance des utilisateurs, et afin de créer les conditions économiques d’un progrès durable, l’Europe est à l’origine d’une réponse juridique et éthique vigoureuse, dont le règlement général sur la protection des données personnelles (RGPD) constitue le premier jalon.

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)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.023
Scholarly communication0.0270.027
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.009

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.326
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; 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegards croisés sur l'économie/Regards croisés sur l'économieSame topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207