MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008342895 · doi:10.7202/706667ar

Évaluation de signalement en utilisant l’approche de réseaux. Comment faire participer le milieu à la résolution de problème

2005· article· fr· W2008342895 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rick Cote

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au cours des dernières années, la Loi sur la protection de la jeunesse (LPJ) a fourni un cadre légal aux intervenants sociaux travaillant en CPEJ. Les intervenants se sentent souvent coincés entre leur rôle d'aidant et leur mandat légal. Cette situation est encore plus difficile en évaluation de signalement en protection de la jeunesse. Le présent article propose un modèle d'évaluation en contexte de protection, avec l'approche de réseaux, pour les jeunes qui présentent des troubles de comportement. Ce modèle vise à faire participer, de façon active, la famille dans le processus d'évaluation/orientation d'un signalement retenu.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService socialSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207