MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028606462

Fièvre européenne d’évaluation de la recherche dans les sciences sociales*

2008· article· en· W7028606462 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicData Analysis and Archiving
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsReprintPublicationSocial researchBasic researchBibliometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Français ci-dessous After hitting Germany recently, the European fever of evaluating research in the social sciences has hit France with the classification of research journals by the official AERES. This dossier of the BMS consists of three contirbutions concerning bibliometrics, evaluation and the recent AERES classification. We reprint the “Introduction” of the research report by Yves Gingras (UQAM), “Research Evaluation Fever – Bad Use of False Indicators”. We then publish a report by Lau...

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)0.157
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.193
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1570.193
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0160.018
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0360.021
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0070.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.054 · 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
DomainEvaluation
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)Same topicData Analysis and ArchivingFrench-language works237,207