<i>Documentation et bibliothèques</i>, 51, 1 (janvier-mars 2005). Numéro thématique consacré à la Bibliothèque nationale du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
d'archives et éclairage priviligié.Les autres chapitres s'adressent, selon le cas, au grand public curieux de I'univers du livre, ou à des auteurs et iditeurs en herbe.On ne peut s'empêcher de se demander comment le grand public réagira à la lecture de la première partie qui, malgré un foisonnement de détails, demeure un peu brouillonne et, inversement, comment les historiens du livre aborderont les sections destinées aux profanes.Malgré ces questionnements, chacun des publics y trouvera sans doute son intirêt.Mentionnons également que L'4mour du livre est doté d'un glossaire et d'un index très utiles, de même que de nombreuses illustrations, pour la plupart très pertinentes, qui en rendent la lecture fort agréable.FRÉDÉRIC BRISSON Universiti' de Sherbrookte Documentation et bibliothèques, sI, I (janvier-mars zoos).Numéro thématique consacré à la Bibliothèque nationale du Québec.17 $.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.028 |
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".