MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390851699

Les revues de littérature systématiques mixtes

2023· other· fr· W4390851699 on OpenAlexaff
Quan Nha Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2023
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les revues de littérature systématiques mixtes consistent à procéder à un examen systématique et à dresser un bilan des travaux disponibles (et notamment des évaluations déjà réalisées) sur un sujet donné, en intégrant des travaux mobilisant des méthodes qualitatives, quantitatives etmixtes. Ce type de revue de littérature permet notamment une meilleure compréhension des interventions et phénomènes complexes. En englobant une diversité de questions évaluatives, elle est particulièrement utile pour éclairer la prise de décision publique.

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)0.096
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.210
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0960.210
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0140.014
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0160.020
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.007

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts→French-language works237,207→