MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W985536317 · doi:10.7202/1030374ar

Les Parlements et leurs bibliothèques, ou les chemins documentaires de la démocratie

2015· article· fr· W985536317 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gilles Gallichan

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumentation et bibliothèques · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article offre un survol de l’apparition des premières bibliothèques parlementaires et législatives dans le monde atlantique au début du XIX e siècle. On constate que ces bibliothèques, tant en Europe qu’en Amérique, ont accompagné les premiers pas des institutions démocratiques. Dans le Nouveau Monde, on a développé un modèle de bibliothèque nationale et parlementaire dont la Bibliothèque du Congrès de Washington est l’exemple ultime. Ailleurs, comme au Québec, pour des raisons historiques, les bibliothèques nationale et parlementaire sont aujourd’hui des institutions distinctes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.022
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumentation et bibliothèquesSame topicPolitical Theory and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207