MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6936562659 · doi:10.58079/b6ni

AàC | Animal et animalité | 15 déc. 2018

2018· article· fr· W6936562659 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnimal Law and Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Context (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Selection (genetic algorithm)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congrès 2019, Université de Colombie-Britannique - du 1er au 4 juin 2019 Animal et animalité. Stratégies et modes de représentation dans les littératures d’expression française Des manuscrits du Moyen Âge aux récits contemporains, l’animal prend une place prépondérante dans notre imaginaire et nos créations littéraires. Central dans Le Roman de Renart autant que dans les Fables de La Fontaine, un bestiaire s’est déployé dans les productions littéraires d’expression française, bestiaire pa...

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.021
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.028

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.272 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)Same topicAnimal Law and WelfareFrench-language works237,207