Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur soulève l’idée que l’opposition à la prostitution que l’on retrouve dans la perspective néoabolitionniste ne s’avère pas incompatible avec les principales valeurs du libéralisme, contrairement à ce que certains auteurs ont pu avancer, mais permet au contraire de réactualiser les notions d’autonomie, de vie privée et de droit au travail. On souhaite ainsi montrer l’importance de ces valeurs, tout en indiquant qu’elles ne peuvent être cohérentes si elles n’intègrent pas la dimension sexuelle de l’identité individuelle. En cherchant à préserver la sexualité de la sphère publique (du travail), le point de vue néoabolitionniste ne s’intéresserait pas tant à la défense des intérêts collectifs concernant la sexualité, comme on a pu le prétendre, mais bien davantage à l’élaboration des conditions permettant l’autonomie sexuelle des individus, lesquelles s’avéreraient incompatibles avec la prostitution.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".