MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163765162 · doi:10.7202/005218ar

Les jeunes et le temps

2002· article· fr· W2163765162 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gilles Pronovost

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'exploitation des données canadiennes les plus récentes sur l'emploi du temps mène à conclure que l'on peut identifier trois grandes trajectoires chez les jeunes. La première a trait aux usages du temps, relativement spécifiques par rapport aux adultes : importance du temps scolaire, plus de temps libre consacré aux sorties et aux pratiques de sociabilité, davantage d'activités physiques et plus de temps consacré aux activités culturelles. La seconde a trait aux représentations du temps ; à mesure qu'ils avancent en âge, les jeunes s'insèrent progressivement et inéluctablement dans l'ordre temporel adulte; ils apprennent à devoir planifier leur temps, à devenir des bourreaux de travail, à manquer de temps pour leurs loisirs et même à devoir réduire leurs heures de sommeil. On peut ainsi parler de « culture à deux temps ». La troisième trajectoire a trait à la participation à la culture ; en observant la dynamique intergénérationnelle en ce qui concerne les médias et les pratiques culturelles, on constate que des processus importants de renouvellement sont à l'œuvre, portés en grande partie par les jeunes générations d'aujourd'hui.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.299
GPT teacher head0.487
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; 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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207