La restructuration de la protection sociale en Amérique du Nord et en Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au cours des années quatre-vingt, la rhétorique conservatrice qui s’est imposée aux États-Unis et en Grande-Bretagne, et avec moins de panache au Canada, a alimenté les spéculations au sujet d’une crise de l’État-providence. Dans le contexte actuel de mondialisation, il importe de saisir si ce cheminement nord-américain ou anglo-saxon connaît une extension en Europe, participant de ce fait à un phénomène de convergence des systèmes de protection sociale, convergence qui impliquerait un changement fondamental de la cohérence sous-jacente aux systèmes de protection sociale en Europe. Cet article compare les États-providence, présente les évolutions récentes dans les pays anglo-saxons et en Europe continentale, et se penche plus particulièrement sur la question du workfare, pour conclure que même si les remises en question sont générales, les trajectoires des pays concernés demeurent ancrées dans les modèles et institutions déjà en place.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".