Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les études comparatives en gestion couvrant le Québec permettent de dégager un portrait de la gestion pratiquée dans cette société. Les premières études des années 1960 et 1970 présentent les gestionnaires québécois comme autoritaires, centralisateurs, allergiques au risque, peu entreprenants et très paternalistes, à l’image des gestionnaires français ; elles comparent généralement les francophones aux anglophones nord-américains. Les études des années 1980 et 1990, plus ouvertes aux comparaisons internationales, mettent en évidence l’individualisme grandissant des gestionnaires québécois et le développement d’un modèle de gestion centré davantage sur l’égalité, la participation, l’arrangement et une certaine forme de consensus. Ce modèle plus communautaire de gestion place le Québec dans la même catégorie que lest petites sociétés d’Europe du Nord (Belgique, Pays-Bas, Pays scandinaves).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".