MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1511447053 · doi:10.3917/trav.024.0073

Détruire les animaux inutiles à la production

2011· article· fr· W1511447053 on OpenAlex
Sébastien Mouret

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTravailler · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceCouragePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé À l’appui d’enquêtes de psychodynamique du travail réalisées en 2006 auprès de salariés en production porcine industrielle au Québec, cet article montre comment la destruction économique d’animaux est vécue comme un « sale boulot » qui va à l’encontre du sens moral que ceux-ci donnent à leur relation de travail aux animaux. Élever, c’est contribuer à la vie des animaux en essayant de les sauver de la maladie et de la mort. C’est aussi avoir le courage d’assumer la responsabilité morale de la mise à mort des bêtes atteintes d’un mal incurable, afin de leur éviter des souffrances inutiles. Pour endurer ce travail de mort, les salariés déploient des stratégies collectives de défense. Cependant, l’adoption de conduites fondées sur un courage viril stigmatise les difficultés de ceux et celles qui ne parviennent pas à détruire des animaux, tandis que ces conduites sont elles-mêmes fragilisées par un turn over important.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.235
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.051 · 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