MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034213742 · doi:10.7202/1029010ar

Contribution et rôle de l’économie sociale au processus de revitalisation en milieu rural fragile : radioscopie de cas de succès et d’insuccès

2015· article· fr· W2034213742 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Majella Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueÉconomie et solidarités · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis plusieurs années, l’économie sociale joue un rôle d’avant-plan dans la vie sociale et économique du Bas-Saint-Laurent. S’inscrivant d’abord dans le cadre d’un mouvement communautaire de type régionaliste, l’économie sociale tend aujourd’hui à constituer, au sein de cette région comme ailleurs au Québec, un modèle de développement visant à satisfaire des besoins que l’appareil étatique et le secteur privé parviennent difficilement à combler. S’appuyant sur le modèle de dynamisme local qui illustre l’effet structurant de l’initiative locale dans le processus de développement, cet article a pour but d’examiner, à partir de deux études de cas effectuées en milieu rural fragile, la contribution de la mobilisation et du leadership comme conditions essentielles à la mise en oeuvre de projets issus de l’économie sociale. À cette fin, nous nous intéresserons à deux communautés rurales qui ont misé sur l’économie sociale en vue de donner un second souffle à leur économie. L’un représente une « histoire à succès », en l’occurrence Sainte-Irène-de-Matapédia, alors que l’autre, Saint-Bruno-de-Kamouraska, constitue plutôt un cas problématique.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉconomie et solidaritésSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207