MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1500068322 · doi:10.1787/9789264039889-7-en

Diverse Approaches and Practices in Europe and Canada

2008· book-chapter· en· W1500068322 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jean‐Louis Laville, Benoît Lévesque, Marguerite Mendell

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal economic and employment development · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionSolidarity economySocial economySection (typography)Social solidaritySolidarityEconomyPolitical scienceEuropean social modelSocial partnersEconomic systemSocial entrepreneurshipSocial dialogueEntrepreneurshipSociologyEconomicsSocial scienceBusinessEconomic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Divided into three distinct sections, this chapter provides an overview of the different approaches to the social economy in the European Union and in Canada, which, with its strong European influences, has utilised and engaged with many European approaches to the social economy. Opening with a discussion of the development of the linkages between the economy and ideas of solidarity, the first section goes on to explore the contemporary development of the social economy within the European Union. The development of the social economy in Canada during the 1970s and 1980s, particularly in Quebec, is examined in the second section. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion of the way in which researchers have sought to portray the “new social economy” and the links between it and ideas of social entrepreneurship and social innovation.

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0240.021
Scholarly communication0.0150.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLocal economic and employment developmentSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207