MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996177518 · doi:10.7202/1066104ar

Respecter les droits des personnes présentant une déficience intellectuelle

2019· article· fr· W2996177518 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aline Tessari Veyre, Murielle Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La Convention relative aux droits des personnes handicapées a été adoptée le 13 décembre 2006 par l’Organisation des Nations Unies. Actuellement, elle est ratifiée par 175 États. Elle constitue le premier traité international juridiquement contraignant explicitant spécifiquement les droits des personnes en situation de handicap. Le développement des connaissances sur le handicap ainsi que de nombreux changements paradigmatiques ont permis et soutenu sa création. Cet article vise à mettre en lumière ces différentes évolutions et leur impact sur les pratiques professionnelles.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207