MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951363294

Occasions numériques et obstacles pour les adultes vulnérables en Ontario [ressource électronique] : un projet de synthèse de la recherche examinant le fossé numérique et les politiques, programmes et pratiques qui pourraient faire une différence

2017· article· fr· W2951363294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine Pinsent‐Johnson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'Ontario est en train de transformer sa facon d'interagir avec le public et d'offrir des services, en faisant passer beaucoup des transactions et interactions courantes en ligne (Gouvernement de l'Ontario, 2017). Une partie de cet effort comprendra des « possibilites d'acquerir ou de perfectionner des competences en numerique pour tous les habitants, en particulier ceux ayant les plus grands besoins » (s.l.). En raison de la strategie de litteratie numerique qui est en cours d'elaboration en Ontario, le present projet de recherche represente une occasion ideale d'explorer pleinement ce que cela signifie d'etre une « province inclusive, au diapason du numerique » (s.l.) et d'examiner des politiques, pratiques et programmes prometteurs qui visent a creer un environnement d'inclusion numerique ailleurs. La presente etude de synthese examine les conclusions de recherches de differentes regions pour mieux comprendre des occasions plus completes d'inclusion et d'apprentissage de la litteratie numerique pour les utilisateurs actuels et futurs de services de gouvernement electronique. - Tire du document.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207