MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181303793 · doi:10.7202/1078732ar

La culture vidéoludique au Québec

2021· article· fr· W3181303793 on OpenAlex
Francis Lavigne

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLoading · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comment parle-t-on des jeux vidéo au fil du temps dans la Belle Province? Peut-on parler d’une culture vidéoludique spécifiquement québécoise? Voilà les deux questions auxquelles nous tentons de répondre dans cet article. Prenant notre départ dans le catalogue général de Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ), nous recensons les documents sur le jeu vidéo, nous attachant aux publications ou discours produits par des Québécois à l’intention d’un public québécois entre 1978 et 2018. Au fil de l’argumentation, nous signalons certaines limites du catalogue de BAnQ, discutons de l’accessibilité à la culture du jeu vidéo au Québec et des problèmes que pose sa préservation, et analysons quelques-uns des documents trouvés par le moteur de recherche de BAnQ.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.137 · 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