MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1671857242 · doi:10.7202/1025087ar

Le capital humain des femmes récemment nommées dans les conseils d’administration des sociétés françaises cotées à Paris

2014· article· fr· W1671857242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Isabelle Allemand, Bénédicte Brullebaut

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPromulgationArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La France a voté en 2011 une loi obligeant les sociétés cotées en bourse ou dépassant certains seuils à nommer des femmes dans leurs conseils d’administration. L’objectif de cet article est de mieux connaître le capital humain des femmes et des hommes administrateurs nommés dans un contexte de loi et de vérifier si les exigences de recrutement sont les mêmes indépendamment du genre. Notre étude, portant sur 112 sociétés, conclut que les critères de sélection des administrateurs sont en majorité les mêmes pour les hommes et les femmes nommés depuis la promulgation de la loi Copé Zimmermann.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207