MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386873467 · doi:10.4000/books.igpde.13095

Le plan Werner : quels enjeux ? quelle démarche ?

2002· book-chapter· fr· W4386873467 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Michel Bloch-Lainé

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitut de la gestion publique et du développement économique eBooks · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Computer scienceGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le plan Werner est un épisode, entre beaucoup d’autres, de la difficile construction européenne.Est-il marquant ? Personnellement je le pense ; vous aussi, sans doute, puisqu’à l’initiative du Comité pour l’histoire économique et financière nous y consacrons cette journée.Mais que veut dire « marquant » ? Car enfin il faut rappeler et souligner que le travail de ce groupe d’hommes s’est, en pratique, rapidement soldé par un échec, dans

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.165 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitut de la gestion publique et du développement économique eBooksSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207