MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008870025

Contre-validation de données recueillies pour le dépistage des difficultés d’apprentissage chez des élèves francophones du primaire de l’Ontario

2005· article· en· W7008870025 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelation (database)Reliability (semiconductor)Test (biology)ValiditySample (material)Psychometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with the importance of clearly identifying learning difficulties in Ontario French-language elementary students. The use of tests to detect learning difficulties has often been criticized, especially in relation to the validity and reliability of instruments. In this study, data collected through the use of three diagnostic tests to detect learning difficulties in mathematics and French as a mother tongue underwent counter-validation.

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)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.196
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.196
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.536
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.033 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207