MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116221902 · doi:10.3917/trav.015.0131

Les femmes dans les métiers non-traditionnels : le général, le particulier et l'ergonomie

2006· article· fr· W2116221902 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Messing, Ana María Seifert, Vanessa Couture

Bibliographic record

VenueTravailler · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Wisner a mis l’accent sur la diversité des êtres humains et sur la nécessité d’adapter le travail à « l’homme ». Il a aussi prôné la nécessité d’élargir les cadres d’analyse pour tenir compte d’un plus grand ensemble d’éléments de la demande sociale. Les études ergonomiques visant le maintien des femmes dans les milieux non-traditionnels ( mntf ) peuvent ainsi être interrogées à la lumière des apports de Wisner. 1) Est-il suffisant de considérer l’adaptation du travail à chaque femme ou devons-nous nous pencher sur cette population en tant que groupe ? 2) Est-ce à l’ergonome d’incorporer les aspects sociaux du travail dans son intervention en mntf ? 3) L’étude ergonomique des Mntf respecte-t-elle les critères de recherche scientifique ?

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.188 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTravaillerSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207