MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016427478 · doi:10.7202/042936ar

Les problèmes actuels de la durée du travail en Pologne

2005· article· fr· W2016427478 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marek Pliszkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude relativement détaillée de la durée du travail des travailleurs en Pologne énonce d'abord les sources des normes pertinentes, à l'intérieur d'un système qui demeure à cet égard centralisé. La notion même de durée elle-même précisée, l'on expose les normes spécifiques qui établissent les temps normaux de travail, de même que celles applicables à des catégories de travailleurs ayant droit à une durée réduite, par exemple ceux qui doivent s'exécuter dans des conditions particulièrement difficiles ou insalubres. Prévalent également, de façon croissante, des normes équivalentes dans des situations où la demande pour la prestation de travail est inégale ; certaines autres occupations justifient l'application de normes prolongées. Le texte expose ensuite le régime des heures supplémentaires : détermination, limitation et compensation, pour envisager des situations particulières, comme le travail de nuit et livrer certaines observations critiques d'ensemble.

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)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicSocial Policies and FamilyFrench-language works237,207