MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1656820463 · doi:10.7202/1015211ar

Quand l’art vaut de l’or : Le programme La culture en entreprise de l’organisme Culture pour tous et l’artiste en tant que médiateur-manageur

2013· article· fr· W1656820463 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Anithe de Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte propose d’analyser le programme La culture en entreprise de l’organisme québécois Culture pour tous. L’objectif premier consiste à montrer que ce programme repose sur un ensemble de valeurs économiques relevant du modèle néolibéral propre à la phase actuelle de l’organisation managériale du capitalisme. Les buts du programme concordent avec les objectifs à saveur néolibérale et du néomanagement des années 1990, défendus par Giovanni Schiuma. Bon nombre d’éléments idéologiques sont inscrits dans le programme La culture en entreprise, parmi lesquels l’instrumentalisation de l’art, résultat du processus de sophistication de l’aliénation de l’individu au travail, par l’intermédiaire de la notion de l’artiste en tant que médiateur-manageur. La perspective de l’intervention culturelle est celle d’augmenter la productivité des entreprises. Nous avançons l’idée à l’effet qu’une intervention culturelle en milieu de travail ne peut pas réenchanter cet univers d’aliénation.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.025
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sociographiquesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207