MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062413602 · doi:10.7202/1002677ar

Le retour de la charité. La solidarité saisie par la main invisible

2011· article· fr· W2062413602 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Éric Pineault

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de recherche sociologique · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le déploiement d’une régulation sociale néolibérale s’accompagne au Québec d’une croissance des organismes charitables et d’une interpénétration des politiques sociales et des pratiques charitables. Cette renaissance de la charité est intimement liée à la transformation de sa forme institutionnelle. Le procès d’institutionnalisation de la charité pendant la modernité, dynamique à la fois idéologique et juridique, culmine au XIXe siècle dans la mise en place d’un système d’assistance sociale charitable conforme aux principes de l’éthique libérale. Si la renaissance de la charité repose sur cet héritage institutionnel, son évolution actuelle est guidée par des déterminations proprement « postmodernes ». Les dimensions idéologiques et juridiques de la charité moderne se sont fondues dans les pratiques « communicationnelles » d’une charité devenue technique de financement plutôt qu’idéal éthique et projet politique. La renaissance de la charité se traduit par l’émergence d’un marché du don qui réduit l’acte charitable à une transaction balisée par le marketing et transforme les droits sociaux en besoins sociaux « non solvables ».

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de recherche sociologiqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207