Bibliographic record
Abstract
S’appuyant sur les données d’un échantillon de quelque 300 travailleurs autonomes québécois recueillies dans le cadre d’une enquête via l’Internet, les auteurs proposent dans cette étude exploratoire une autre dimension essentielle de l’hétérogénéité des travailleurs autonomes et de l’explication de la longévité de leur expérience. Cette dimension plus subjective se fonde sur la diversité des appréciations que font les répondants de leur expérience, non seulement le degré de satisfaction révélé mais aussi son interprétation. L’analyse du contenu des réponses à une question ouverte révèle cinq profils de travailleurs autonomes différents quant à l’appréciation de leur expérience et quant à leur volonté de la poursuivre ou non. Ces appréciations particulières générées par les avantages intrinsèques du travail autonome sont surtout associées à des aspirations et motivations propres à chaque profil.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".