MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107640528 · doi:10.3917/etu.4277.0029

What does it mean to provide information today?

2020· article· fr· W3107640528 on OpenAlexaff
Didier Pourquery

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La crise sanitaire a été un bon révélateur de notre relation complexe aux médias. L’envie d’en savoir plus s’associe à une méfiance croissante à l’égard des journalistes. Certains citoyens cessent de suivre l’actualité ou succombent au complotisme. D’autres sont menacés d’« infobésité » face au flux des chaînes d’information en continu ou des réseaux sociaux. Il est temps de réinventer la production d’information selon des axes professionnels simples et solides : curiosité et générosité. Et réfléchir à l’utilité des informations que l’on partage.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0070.023
Scholarly communication0.0280.038
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.007

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudesSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207