MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995819726 · doi:10.7202/038619ar

La sociologie relationnelle comme principes structurants et comme théories sociales

2009· article· fr· W1995819726 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rachid Bagaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles perspectives en sciences sociales · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Realism in Sociology
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le modèle d’analyse relationnelle est au coeur de la pensée sociologique. Il n’existe pas, cependant, de consensus sur la façon d’utiliser et de traduire ce model relationnel dans la pratique de la recherche. L’auteur insiste sur l’importance de distinguer entre les conditions de faire la sociologie relationnelle et la mise en pratique du principe relationnel. Il présente un cas de figure du modèle relationnel et illustre ce principe par un exemple tiré de ses recherches dans le champ de la sociologie du travail.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.041
Scholarly communication0.0150.019
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles perspectives en sciences socialesSame topicCritical Realism in SociologyFrench-language works237,207