Le comptable et la responsabilité sociale de l'entreprise : une question de connaissances ou de compétences?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Nous nous intéressons dans cet article à l’interaction entre les diverses formes de savoir comptable professionnel en matière de responsabilité sociale de l’entreprise et, à travers ce savoir, au rôle joué par la profession dans l’ouverture du comptable à cet égard. Aux fins de notre analyse, nous découpons ce savoir professionnel en trois espaces de production de connaissances, soit les espaces promotionnel, formatif et expérientiel. À la suite de la proposition d’un cadre d’analyse socioconstructiviste des compétences, nous interrogeons des comptables sur leur pratique relativement à la responsabilité sociale et environnementale, incluant leur formation, de même que sur leur attitude envers elle. Même si cette attitude est favorable, un écart persiste entre le savoir et les pratiques comptables, mais ce n’est pas faute de disposer d’un savoir codifié important élaboré par la profession comptable en la matière.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".