MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Déploiement stratégique et pratiques logistiques exemplaires : une enquête canadienne

2013· article· fr· W1472668995 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLogistique & Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans un contexte de mondialisation qui accentue les pressions concurrentielles, les entreprises souhaitent déployer des pratiques exemplaires (best practices) afin d’améliorer la compétitivité de leur chaîne logistique. Malgré leur apparente simplicité, de telles pratiques sont souvent spécifiques au caractère particulier de l’organisation qui la met en œuvre. Elles ne sont donc pas nécessairement universelles. À partir de 30 entretiens menés auprès de cadres supérieurs d’entreprises situées au Canada, cet article poursuit deux objectifs : 1) caractériser les formes que peuvent prendre ces pratiques exemplaires et 2) étudier le déploiement de ces pratiques. L’article est aussi une occasion de proposer un modèle de mise en œuvre des pratiques exemplaires dans le domaine de la logistique.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.237 · 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