University College News / Nouvelles des universités et des collèges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soutenances de thèses de maitrise réussies pour trois étudiants en sciences forestières rois étudiants inscrits en maitrise ès sciences forestières de la Faculté de foresterie de UMCE, ont soutenu avec succès leur thèse récemment.Les travaux d' Abbe Jonas Assamoi, de la Côte d'Ivoire, portaient sur « Les effets de la fertilisation organique à base de fumier de volailles sur la physiologie et la nutrition du sapin de noël en plantation ».Issifi Boureima, du Niger, s' est quant à lui penché sur « Les effets de l' éclaircie pré-commerciale sur la croissance et la qualité technologique des tiges dans un peuplement de feuillus tolérants : analyses à l' échelle du peuplement et à l' échelle des arbres d'avenir ».Enfin, Pierre Migolet, du Gabon, a présenté sa recherche qui traitait de « L'utilisation des réseaux de neurones pour la cartographie par krigeage de la biomasse aérienne forestière à partir des données de l'image satellitaire Ikonos et géospatiales multisources ».
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.146 | 0.034 |
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".