MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159188973 · doi:10.7202/1076538ar

Caractériser les îlots de capitalisation d’entraîneurs de haut niveau experts à partir d’une approche inductive

2021· article· fr· W3159188973 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stéphane Fukazawa-Couckuyt, Jean-François Robin

Bibliographic record

VenueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinaires · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans les projets de capitalisation de savoirs issus de l’expérience, la question de l’expertise permet de centrer le recueil et le traitement des savoirs sur ce qui constitue une plus-value pour le public cible du projet. Dans une recherche avec et sur des entraîneurs de haut niveau experts, une approche inductive sur un corpus de dix-huit entretiens individuels a permis de mieux caractériser ce qui a été appelé les « îlots de capitalisation », liés à l’expertise individuelle. Il en ressort que si un modèle théorique et prescriptif des îlots des entraîneurs experts ne peut être établi, des tendances émergent. Une première typologie des modes de constitution de ces îlots est formalisée.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.260 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinairesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207