MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112499565 · doi:10.4000/dms.5873

Collecter et gérer les données : réflexions à l’heure du big data

2020· article· fr· W3112499565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gérard Puimatto

Bibliographic record

VenueDistances et médiations des savoirs · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les presses universitaires de Montréal nous proposent une réflexion sur les méthodes de recherche en sciences sociales en contexte numérique, faite de doutes, d’essais, de limites. Le numérique, s’il a largement bouleversé la vie sociale, s’impose aujourd’hui comme une évidence dont on doit tenir compte dans les méthodes de recherche. Aux méthodes traditionnelles, faites d’enquêtes, d’échantillonnage, de représentativité, on juxtapose aujourd’hui les techniques dérivées du big data, établiss...

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)0.239
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.419
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2390.419
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0160.026
Science and technology studies0.0090.036
Scholarly communication0.0350.037
Open science0.0060.016
Research integrity0.0040.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.296
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.085 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venueDistances et médiations des savoirsSame topicComputational and Text Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207