MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055511172

Des universités se mettent à la distance. Est-ce un bon choix ?

2016· article· fr· W7055511172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMaterials Science
TopicThermal properties of materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)FrenchGeneral interestPoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La rubrique Débat-discussion a abordé tout au long des numéros de cette année la question des stratégies de survie d'universités à distance traditionnelles, notamment la Téluq et l'Open University, dans un contexte « économique et politique exceptionnellement défavorable » (Lamy, 2001, p. 617 cité par Peraya, DMS, 2016, 13, § 16), mais aussi face à la concurrence des universités présentielles, unimodales, qui progressivement ont adopté la voie de la bimodalité. Pour ce dernier tour de parole, nous avons sollicité des acteurs qui appartiennent justement à deux importantes universités connues pour cette évolution : l'UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, (plus de 300.000 étudiant.e.s en 2016) et l'Université Laval à Québec (60.000 étudiant.e.s en 2014-2015). Toutes deux sont de « grandes » universités classiques, l'UNAM est la plus importante université d'Amérique latine, et l'Université Laval à Québec, la première université francophone en Amérique. Enfin, pour clôturer la thématique de cette rubrique, Denys Lamontagne, fondateur (en 1996) et directeur de Thot Cursus, se risque à quelques réflexions distancées et incisives.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.015
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.198
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva)Same topicThermal properties of materialsFrench-language works237,207