MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949162403 · doi:10.4000/sociologies.4145

Repenser les problèmes sociaux

2021· article· fr· W1949162403 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologieS · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La représentation sociologique des problèmes sociaux centrée sur l’existence d’une mosaïque de groupes de personnes non conformes, à risque, dangereux ou en danger laisse peu de place à l’analyse des transformations sociétales, transversales et liantes lorsqu’il s’agit de penser ce qui « pose problème » aujourd’hui. En outre, elle véhicule la perception que certaines défavorisations, différences et comportements sont l’apanage de certaines catégories ou de certains groupes de personnes et consécutivement, que la psychologie, la psychiatrie, la psychoéducation, ou encore le travail social ou la criminologie cliniques sont les disciplines toutes désignées pour comprendre, gérer et régler les problèmes sociaux. La remise en question de ce regard populationnel, substantialiste, psychologisant et, parfois, franchement folklorisant, relance le débat sur liens entre socialité ordinaire et problèmes sociaux qu’il s’agit selon nous d’actualiser. Ce texte vise à prendre part à ce débat en proposant quelques pistes générales pour repenser les problèmes sociaux en fonction des transformations sociétales récentes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.241 · 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