MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015494078

Chapitre 1 - Une histoire de l’innovation et de ses usages dans l’agriculture

2018· book-chapter· fr· W3015494078 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ludovic Temple, Yuna Chiffoleau, Jean-Marc Touzard

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé. Les travaux sur l’innovation dans l’agriculture sont relativement récents, mais s’inscrivent dans une histoire plus longue des approches du progrès technique et des transformations du secteur agricole. Ce chapitre revient sur l’histoire de l’usage de la notion d’innovation dans l’agriculture et sur les travaux dans ce domaine, en se centrant sur les contributions de l’économie et de la sociologie. Trois périodes marquent cette histoire : jusqu’à la Seconde Guerre mondiale, la notion d’innovation n’est pas utilisée dans la littérature, mais la question du progrès technique, progressivement évacuée par les économistes, s’affirme dans les sciences agricoles ; sur les 40 années qui suivent, les approches diffusionnistes de l’innovation concernent tous les secteurs, notamment l’agriculture, dont la modernisation est accompagnée par les sociologues et les économistes ; enfin, à partir des années 1980, les critiques du modèle de développement agricole antérieur sont croissantes et s’accompagnent d’un renouvellement de la pensée sur l’innovation, donnant de nouvelles perspectives pour les recherches sur l’innovation dans l’agriculture et les domaines associés.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.007

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)Same topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207