Bibliographic record
Abstract
La réduction et la restructuration de l'État-providence s'inscrivent dans une tendance mondiale qui, malgré les critiques des syndicats et de la gauche traditionnelle, est de plus en plus acceptée voire saluée par les intellectuels et les militants progressistes favorables aux initiatives de «la base». L'auteur soutient qu'il n'y a rien de bien nouveau ou original dans le fait de confier une partie des services sociaux aux organisations charitables et au secteur communautaire: des pays comme le Canada, qui n'ont jamais connu la frontière entre charité privée et assistance publique caractéristique du système de protection sociale britannique depuis la première Poor Law, ont toujours eu une « économie sociale mixte », l'État subventionnant et réglementant les bonnes œuvres sans exercer de contrôle direct sur la prestation des services. L'histoire de l'Ontario illustre cette proposition et éclaire le débat sur les vertus respectives du secteur privé et de l'État en matière de programmes sociaux.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".