Bibliographic record
Abstract
Près de vingt ans après son émergence, et après quinze ans de mise en oeuvre effective au niveau européen, qu’en est-il des effets dugender mainstreaming, cet instrument qui s’attache à identifier l’impact éventuel de l’action publique sur les femmes et les hommes ainsi que sur les rapports de genre ? L’article vise à évaluer les effets de ce nouvel instrument d’action publique sur la politique qui constitue son berceau, c’est-à-dire la politique de promotion de l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes. Legender mainstreamingn’est ni une simple conséquence ni une cause parmi d’autres du changement de la politique communautaire d’égalité. Il en est certes un révélateur, mais il en est aussi un des leviers principaux. En tant qu’instrument d’action publique, il a des effets propres qui ont conduit à une transformation en profondeur du régime de genre de l’Union européenne.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".