Concevoir un jeu comme objet documentaire et outil de médiation culturelle en bibliothèque universitaire : retour réflexif sur le cas de <i>TRIPLEX</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente un retour réflexif sur le développement du jeu TRIPLEX , conçu au Laboratoire ludique du Service des bibliothèques de l’Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). À partir d’une méthodologie de design collaboratif, l’équipe a développé un jeu destiné à renforcer la confiance linguistique des personnes en apprentissage du français, tout en l’intégrant comme objet documentaire dans les collections de la bibliothèque. En articulant les dimensions ludiques, pédagogiques et documentaires, TRIPLEX démontre que le jeu peut devenir un levier d’inclusion linguistique et un outil de médiation culturelle au sein des bibliothèques universitaires. L’article mobilise un cadre théorique croisant la notion de document élargi, la bibliothèque comme tiers-lieu et la construction de la confiance linguistique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".