MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1498935156 · doi:10.4000/pistes.3816

L’importance des mécanismes de régulation temporelle dans le travail des opératrices de métiers à fibres libérées relativement à l’automatisation des machines et au travail de nuit

2000· article· fr· W1498935156 on OpenAlexaffvenue
R Lachance

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé · 2000
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsCollège de Valleyfield
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’analyse de l’activité de travail des opératrices de métiers à fibres libérées a permis de mettre en évidence les stratégies de régulation temporelle mises en œuvre par les opératrices pour faire face à la variabilité des conditions d’exécution du travail. Le travail de nuit semble intensifier les difficultés rencontrées par les travailleuses puisque 67 % des accidents s’y produisent. L’activité de nettoyage apparaît comme l’un des principaux mécanismes d’adaptation face à ces conditions variables et met en évidence l’importance des exigences mentales autant que physiques du travail des opératrices de métiers à fibres libérées. Cette analyse illustre également comment l’automatisation des métiers à fibres libérées semble avoir entraîné des sollicitations musculo-squelettiques plus importantes que prévues.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé→Same topicOccupational Health and Safety Research→French-language works237,207→