MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985619122 · doi:10.4000/books.msha.4975

Méthodologie de la mesure de l’audience en radio : diversité des méthodes et divergences de résultats, le cas de la Belgique

2005· book-chapter· fr· W2985619122 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Antoine

Bibliographic record

VenueMaison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine eBooks · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Labour, Employment and Social Solidarity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les faiblesses de la mesure d’audience radiophonique Dans le contexte des méthodologies mises en œuvre afin de mesurer, de manière la plus précise qu’il soit, la quantité et les spécificités socio-économiques des individus utilisateurs des médias audiovisuels, les résultats récoltés par les méthodes d’audimétrie télévisuelles ont, depuis une vingtaine d’années, affirmé une efficacité au moins quantitative. Même s’il ne manque pas de critiques qui puissent être adressées à l’audimétrie télévis...

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.128
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.128
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine eBooksSame topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207