Bibliographic record
Abstract
La puissance et le pouvoir sont des notions fondamentales pour l'étude de la négociation collective. Bien qu'ayant été au coeur des travaux fondateurs des relations industrielles de part et d'autre de l'Atlantique, leur traitement demeure pourtant insatisfaisant. Il convient donc de proposer une conceptualisation spécifi que et nuancée de celles-ci, permettant le cumul des acquis de connaissance afi n, notamment, de mieux comprendre les aff rontements entre employeurs et syndicats ainsi que l'équilibre au sein des régimes de rapports collectifs du travail. Pour ce faire, l'auteur propose une synthèse des travaux antérieurs intégrant certaines contributions majeures du champ de la sociologie politique. La puissance et le pouvoir, notions correspondant à une capacité et son actualisation, y sont envisagés du point de vue de la dépendance qu'entretiennent les parties à la négociation collective ainsi que des ressources et de la capacité stratégique de ces dernières.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".