Participation de l'information et des technologies d'information et de communication dans le développement durable : cas du Liban
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le developpement durable connait plusieurs interpretations. Il ne peut etre reel que dans la mesure ou il est rendu concret et operationnel, par consequent mesurable et source d’informations. La mesure de la durabilite est liee a celle de notre stock de capital, forme des dimensions environnementale, economique, sociale, et humaine. Le savoir, promoteur de toutes les durabilites dans ces differentes dimensions, est un capital a mesurer et a leguer aux generations futures. Les notions de «durabilite informationnelle» et de «paradigme de durabilite informationnelle» sont proposees en consequence, montrant en exergue la participation de l’information et des technologies d’information et de communication dans le developpement durable. La definition d’un «systeme d’information sur le developpement durable», base sur ce paradigme, se presente sous forme d’un systeme complexe centralise et decentralise, dont la faisabilite depend des conditions d’un pays comme celles du Liban.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.061 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".