MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022549114 · doi:10.3917/nrp.015.0091

Travailler à la marge : reconnaître des « professions oubliées »

2013· article· fr· W2022549114 on OpenAlex
Leny Sato

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelle revue de psychosociologie · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, nous nous centrons sur le travail d’un segment considérable de travailleurs au Brésil, qui sont maintenus à la marge. Ce sont, surtout, des travailleurs dont le revenu est issu d’activités de travail non protégées par le rapport salarié (il s’agit d’activités non régulées par l’État) et, dans ce sens, ce sont des travailleurs précarisés. À partir de la constatation selon laquelle l’expression « travail informel » est largement utilisée pour qualifier ces situations, nous avons identifié des textes qui situent l’historicité du terme et qui problématisent son usage. Finalement, nous montrons qu’en déplaçant le regard et les analyses vers la vie quotidienne, nous pouvons être en mesure de reconnaître la singularité et les réelles conditions des métiers qui se trouvent dans cette sphère, des métiers qui, selon João do Rio, sont des « professions oubliées ».

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.009

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.292 · 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