MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1903522259 · doi:10.3917/rfas.053.0007

L'action sociale des caisses de retraite : un dispositif complémentaire de la protection sociale des personnes âgées

2005· article· fr· W1903522259 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Cadiou, Bernard Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue française des affaires sociales · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Les politiques sociales connaissent de profondes restructurations qui affectent tant les interventions de l’État que les prestations sociales offertes par d’autres institutions. Dans ce cadre, cet article se concentre sur l’évolution de l’action sociale des caisses de retraite en examinant son rôle dans le système de gestion de la vieillesse. En proposant aux retraités toute une série d’aides plus ou moins innovantes, l’action sociale répond aux ambitions généralistes de la politique nationale de la vieillesse mise en place depuis les années soixante-dix. Elle participe à l’intégration sociale des retraités et constitue de fait un complément aux transferts assurantiels. Néanmoins, elle est aujourd’hui prise dans une dynamique de redéfinition de ses priorités en se ciblant avant tout sur les populations les plus démunies. Cette évolution permet de s’interroger sur les transformations de la protection sociale et notamment sur les tensions entre l’universalité des prestations sociales et l’assistance aux plus défavorisés.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue française des affaires socialesSame topicAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207