MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1589354619 · doi:10.7202/005087ar

Les métiers relationnels de service public : approche gestionnaire, approche politique

2002· article· fr· W1589354619 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lise Demailly

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesBusiness administrationBusinessArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les métiers relationnels peuvent être étudiés comme des métiers comme les autres au lieu d'être maintenus à part, au nom des relations décrétées rebelles à l'objectivation du regard sociologique ou économique qu'ils mettraient enjeu. Mais penser sociologiquement tout travail relationnel comme étant avant tout une prestation de service relève d'une vision managériale des choses qui masque la spécificité des métiers relationnels de services publics. Ceux-ci produisent non des prestations de service, mais des actes sociopolitiques, culturels, éthiques, interpersonnels.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.030
Scholarly communication0.0220.023
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations32
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207