MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6899245367 · doi:10.58079/14yu

Profession historienne ?

2020· other· fr· W6899245367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2020
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomain (mathematical analysis)Field (mathematics)Historical heritage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce projet de journée d’étude veut mettre en lumière les diverses formes de participation et de contribution des femmes du Canada français au dynamisme d’un champ historique en constante métamorphose. Par là, il entend aussi offrir de nouvelles pistes d’analyse pour déjouer la construction genrée du champ de la pratique historienne et mieux comprendre l’effacement mémoriel de certaines de ses ouvrières. Aux côtés de figures mieux établies, qui retiendront aussi l’attention, se trouvent plusieurs praticiennes n’ayant pas investi à hauteur suffisante les formes canoniques d’expression disciplinaire - la monographie d’histoire, l’article scientifique ou la synthèse historique - mais dont la contribution mérite d’être mieux reconnue et étudiée.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.011

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)French-language works237,207