MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W55127435

L’Agenda canadien de recherche en loisir et parcs : combler le fossé entre la recherche et la pratique

2009· article· fr· W55127435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Holly Donohoe, Marc-André Lavigne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’Agenda canadien de recherche est un projet de l’Association canadienne des parcs et loisirs, initie au printemps 2006. Il vise, d’une part, a amener les professionnels en loisir a recourir a la recherche et, d’autre part, a assurer un meilleur transfert des connaissances entre les milieux academiques et les milieux pratiques. L’Agenda preconise la realisation de recherche cooperative - c’est-a-dire des etudes realisees en collaboration avec le milieu dans le but d’ameliorer des problematiques vecues concretement dans la communaute – et propose une serie de mesures pour combler le fosse croissant entre la pratique et la recherche.

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)0.113
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1130.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0220.019
Scholarly communication0.0340.024
Open science0.0050.033
Research integrity0.0160.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.010

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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.145 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207