MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104373778 · doi:10.7202/057582ar

L’État-providence, providence de l’État à l’égard des femmes?

2005· article· fr· W2104373778 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bérengère Marques-Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches féministes · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alors que le concept de « la féminisation de la pauvreté » a été introduit par les chercheuses féministes contemporaines, le concept de la catégorie sociale de sexe comme catégorie d'analyse a été introduit dans le discours de la politique sociale en Grande-Bretagne à la fin du XIX e siècle et au début du XX e par les enquêteuses sociales. Cet article fournit une étude de cas des façons dont la catégorie sociale de sexe a été introduite par Helen Bosanquet et Beatrice Webb, toutes deux membres de la commission royale d'enquête sur la Loi des pauvres et du soulagement de la misère (1905-1909).

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.242
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches féministesSame topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207