MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

La Commission épiscopale de coopération Canada-Amérique latine (CECAL) / The Canadian Episcopal Commission for Latin America

2019· article· fr· W2954818006 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gilles Routhier

Bibliographic record

VenueChrétiens et sociétés/Chrétiens et sociétés XVIe-XXIe siècles · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionHumanitiesLatin AmericansPolitical scienceEthnologyArtHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nom officiel suivi du nom usuel et anciennes dénominations éventuelles, lieu du siègeThe Canadian Episcopal Commission for Latin America / Commission épiscopale de coopération Canada-Amérique latine (CECAL), OttawaFondation : date, lieu, fondateursAvant que l’épiscopat canadien ne mette sur pied la CECAL, les évêques du Québec, lors de leur session trimestrielle tenue à l’Archevêché de Québec le 9 décembre 1957, prennent la décision de créer une commission épiscopale chargée de coordonner l’...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChrétiens et sociétés/Chrétiens et sociétés XVIe-XXIe sièclesSame topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207