MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245714620 · doi:10.7202/1086790ar

La recherche qualitative assistée par ordinateur pour les budgets minceurs, est-ce possible?

2007· article· fr· W4245714620 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Marie Miron, Jean-François Dragon

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches qualitatives · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicData Analysis and Archiving
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente et discute de solutions alternatives à l’utilisation des logiciels commerciaux d’analyse qualitative. Cette présentation non exhaustive est le fruit de plusieurs centaines d’heures d’exploration au cours des dernières années. Nous présentons quelques logiciels utiles à différentes étapes de la recherche et en discutons brièvement. Puis, nous partageons quelques réflexions éthiques quant à la recherche qualitative et à l’avenir des logiciels libres. Cet intérêt pour les logiciels disponibles publiquement, sans frais, s’inscrit dans une perspective d’ouverture et d’accessibilité des outils informatiques considérés comme un patrimoine devant être accessible à tous.

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)0.135
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1350.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.565
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.011 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches qualitativesSame topicData Analysis and ArchivingFrench-language works237,207