MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563518654 · doi:10.7202/008574ar

Techniques industrielles, le Japon et l’utilisation des capacités humaines1

2004· article· fr· W1563518654 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophical and Theoretical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSubordination (linguistics)ArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur se demande s’il est possible de développer des techniques industrielles adaptées aux humains dans le capitalisme actuel. Le développement industriel capitaliste a donné lieu à des systèmes techniques, tels le taylorisme et le fordisme, fondés sur la subordination des humains aux machines. Pour Marx, cette subordination faisait partie intégrante des structures du capitalisme, fondé sur la rentabilité. Certains auteurs ont tenté de briser cette subordination, même dans le cadre du capitalisme, en imaginant des techniques, fondées sur l’informatique, qui requalifieraient le travail industriel. D’autres ont vu dans la mise en place de nouveaux systèmes dans les industries japonaises (systèmes Toyota et Fujitsu) des exemples de techniques industrielles différentes, qui redonneraient le contrôle des machines aux humains. En examinant de plus près l’utilisation japonaise des techniques industrielles, cet article en arrive à une conclusion mitigée : il y a des possibilités, mais limitées, de développement de techniques adaptées aux capacités humaines dans le capitalisme.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.247 · 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