MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W210828436 · doi:10.4000/pistes.3367

Systèmes d’instruments des opérateurs. Un point de vue pour analyser le rapport aux règles de sécurité

2002· article· fr· W210828436 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christine Vidal-­Gomel

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePrudencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les opérateurs élaborent et utilisent différents moyens pour gérer les risques professionnels : règles de sécurité, savoir-faire de prudence, pratiques informelles de sécurité. Nous proposons d’analyser cet ensemble de moyens comme un système d’instruments constitué par ces travailleurs au cours de leur expérience professionnelle. Un accident du travail d’un opérateur de maintenance des systèmes électriques est analysé de ce point de vue. Cette approche permet de dépasser le cadre de la violation des règles de sécurité, de prendre en compte l’ensemble des moyens développés par les opérateurs pour gérer les risques, de considérer leurs relations et d’inscrire leur rapport aux règles de sécurité dans une approche de développement.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santéSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207