MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968128987 · doi:10.7202/1002241ar

L’évaluation des services d’établissement pour les personnes immigrantes et réfugiées : enjeux conceptuels et méthodologiques

2011· article· fr· W1968128987 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Adrienne Chambon, Ted Richmond

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de recherche sociologique · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le secteur des services pour nouveaux arrivants au Canada est en pleine mutation. Nous examinons les enjeux et débats que soulève la question des normes et des cadres d’évaluation pertinents pour le secteur, et les principes qui les sous-tendent. Nous dégageons des lignes de réflexion théorique et identifions diverses approches et initiatives concrètes sur le terrain. Nous posons la question de la relation entre évaluation et politique sociale dans le domaine de l’immigration et des services. En conclusion, nous suggérons des stratégies envisageables.

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)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.679
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.127 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de recherche sociologiqueSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207