Bibliographic record
Abstract
De nouvelles professions ont émergé dans le dernier tiers du XXe siècle en parallèle aux professions libérales traditionnelles qui ont pendant longtemps dominé le paysage des emplois les plus prestigieux au Québec. La contribution propose une typologie comprenant dix-sept types différents de professions répartis en quatre grands secteurs : les professions libérales, les professions en sciences pures et appliquées, les professions en sciences sociales et les professions dans le domaine culturel et des communications. Elle vise à cerner quelle a été l’évolution des effectifs dans chacun des types afin de caractériser les changements qui ont marqué ce segment de la structure sociale. Ainsi, les professions en gestion et finances dominent maintenant au sein des professions libérales devant celles du secteur de la santé, le nombre d’avocats et de notaires a cru plus rapidement que le nombre de médecins et de nouvelles professions en sciences sociales et dans le champ de la culture sont apparues. La professionnalisation de l’ensemble de la main-d’oeuvre québécoise s’est largement accentuée, notamment à la suite du développement du système universitaire, et les professions se sont très largement féminisées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".