MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100630256 · doi:10.7202/008912ar

Le bénévolat : de la production « domestique » de services à la production de « citoyenneté »

2004· article· fr· W2100630256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frédéric Lesemann

Bibliographic record

VenueNouvelles pratiques sociales · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article cherche à analyser le bénévolat autrement que par rapport à une culture domestique de production de services à laquelle il est généralement associé, avec ses dimensions caritatives, pour en traduire le mouvement de fond qui paraît l’animer aujourd’hui : celui d’une volonté de contribuer de manière active et autonome au mieux-être d’une société qui se définit par ses « projets » et dans laquelle l’individu se réalise par ses « activités ». Il s’agit ainsi d’inscrire le bénévolat dans une culture de la responsabilité civique plutôt que dans une culture du devoir et de souligner la portée politique de ses pratiques. Le bénévolat est au coeur de la problématique de la transformation en cours des relations entre l’État, le marché et la société, ce qui lui confère son importance stratégique. Dans le cadre de l’institutionnalisation croissante des relations entre l’État et la « société civile », le bénévolat devient un véhicule légitime de citoyenneté beaucoup plus qu’un instrument d’amélioration de l’offre et de la dispensation des services. Il contribue à la lutte contre l’exclusion sociale associée aux nouveaux risques sociétaux.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouvelles pratiques socialesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207