Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article analyse le système d’allocation des emplois dans le travail journalier aux États-Unis, dont la main-d’oeuvre est fréquemment composée de migrants hispaniques sans papiers. À partir de cinq études de cas, il compare l’embauche informelle réalisée sur des parkings ou devant des grandes surfaces, d’une part au travail journalier formel en agence commerciale, d’autre part à l’embauche par l’intermédiaire de centres associatifs autogérés. L’examen des modes alternatifs d’allocation proposés par les intermédiaires associatifs montre que ceux-ci, soumis aux mêmes contraintes que les intermédiaires commerciaux, reproduisent des traits observés chez ces derniers, tout en fournissant néanmoins des services cruciaux aux journaliers et en constituant une base solide de leur mobilisation juridique et politique, que ce soit pour leur droit à chercher des emplois sur un lieu public, pour la récupération de salaires non versés, ou pour les réformes permettant de régulariser leur statut migratoire.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".