MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889701645 · doi:10.26071/ogsl-m0vn-tv62

Voir la Mer: Inventaire archéologique subaquatique dans le Parc du Bic (2019)

2019· report· fr· W6889701645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOGSL repository · 2019
Typereport
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Statistical analysisPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet inventaire archéologique subaquatique réalisé dans le parc du Bic à l’été 2019 s’inscrit à l’intérieur d’une démarche entreprise dans le cadre du projet multidisciplinaire Voir la Mer, financé par le programme Odyssée du Réseau du Québec Maritime. Cette étude comprend une description de la méthodologie appliquée et de l’environnement maritime du Bic. Le contexte historique retrace les différentes occupations préhistoriques et historiques au Bic à partir de documents anciens, de données archéologiques et récentes, permettant d’identifier les zones côtières d’intérêt archéologique. Un inventaire des naufrages et incidents maritimes recensés a été assemblé en combinant différentes sources afin de cibler les zones présentant un fort potentiel archéologique subaquatique. L’intervention comprend un inventaire archéologique subaquatique par télédétection au moyen de trois instruments géophysiques : le sonar à balayage latéral, le sondeur multifaisceaux et le profileur de sous-surface. Elle a été réalisée entre le 15 juillet et le 2 août 2019. Ce document est le rapport archéologique de mission tel que présenté au Ministère de la Culture et des Communications du Québec en lien avec le permis archéologique obtenu.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOGSL repositoryFrench-language works237,207