MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118942295 · doi:10.3917/comla1.206.0111

La loi de Zipf 70 ans après : pluridisciplinarité, modèles et controverses

2020· article· fr· W3118942295 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Bertin, Thierry Lafouge

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication & langages · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZipf's lawNominationHumanitiesPhilosophyMathematicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il y a cinquante ans, la revue Communication et Langages consacrait un article à George Kingsley Zipf 1 , chercheur américain peu connu en France. Zipf a mis en évidence des relations mathématiques simples, regroupées sous la dénomination Loi de Zipf, concernant les régularités des fréquences des mots dans un texte. Cette loi a suscité de la part des chercheurs de toute discipline une grande curiosité et alimenté dès les années 1950 des débats dans la communauté scientifique. Qu’en est-il aujourd’hui, soixante-dix ans après la publication de son célèbre ouvrage Human behavior and the principle of least effort ?

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.019
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication & langagesSame topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207