MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2167516959 · doi:10.7202/706453ar

Leçons à tirer de nos traditions en service social des groupes

2005· article· fr· W2167516959 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Margot Breton

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologySociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'article s'inspire des trois sources principales du service social des groupes : le mouvement des « settlements », celui de la « récréation » et celui de « l'éducation progressiste ». S'appuyant sur le double intérêt de cette profession pour l'individuel et le collectif, l'auteure discute et actualise les principes qui ont orienté les trois mouvements précités, et donne un aperçu des défis qu'a à relever le service social des groupes dans notre monde complexe et en état de changement rapide.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.030
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService social→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→