Pistes d’analyse concernant l’impact social des activités du tiers secteur d’économie sociale dans quatre arrondissements de la Ville de Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les auteurs discutent, d’une part, de l’urgence de mettre en valeur l’originalité de l’impact et les bienfaits des interventions de certains organismes du tiers secteur en économie sociale tant sur les individus que sur les communautés et, d’autre part, ils traitent de la rareté des dispositifs méthodologiques d’évaluation appropriés. Ils proposent de systématiser un ensemble de buts socioéconomiques correspondant aux activités du tiers secteur et qui distinguent celles-ci du secteur public ou du secteur privé à but lucratif. Leur proposition se fonde sur les résultats d’une recherche menée à la fin des années 1990 avec plus de 150 organismes à Montréal, tout en étant rattachée à des fondements théoriques qui, depuis le Forum national sur la santé, notamment, obtient un certain consensus entre chercheurs et politiques.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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.
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".