MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173650658 · doi:10.3917/crii.069.0079

Les particuliers, les banques et la confiance : un cas d’étude en Italie

2015· article· fr· W2173650658 on OpenAlex
Valentina Moiso

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritique internationale · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude ethnographique présente les résultats d’une enquête menée dans deux banques italiennes sur l’influence des conseillers bancaires sur les ménages endettés. Le matériel a été collecté lors de 73 entretiens conduits auprès de détenteurs de prêts immobiliers à taux variables et de leurs conseillers bancaires. L’objectif est de décrire quels ont été les choix et les motivations des emprunteurs lorsque le montant de leurs mensualités de remboursement a grimpé en flèche au moment de la crise financière de 2008. Les éléments recueillis durant l’enquête montrent quelques-uns des moyens par lesquels les banques influencent les clients et reconfigurent les ressources disponibles pour les familles, ainsi que les instruments qu’elles peuvent utiliser, facteur nouveau et crucial d'inégalités dans la société contemporaine.

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.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.245 · 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