MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344453939

Qu'est-ce que l’Investissement Socialement Responsable (ISR) ? (What is Socially Responsible Investment (SRI)?)

2011· article· fr· W2344453939 on OpenAlexaff
Diane‐Laure Arjaliès

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceLegitimationHumanitiesEconomyEconomicsPhilosophyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article etudie l’evolution des formes et des objectifs de l’Investissement socialement responsable (ISR) aux Etats-Unis et en Europe des annees 1920 jusqu’a nos jours. En s’interessant a la fois aux fondements theoriques et aux caracteristiques des fonds ISR au cours du temps, il dresse un panorama des differents types de fonds en fonction de leur appartenance a un referentiel societal ou economique. En montrant la complexite et la diversite de l’ISR d’hier et d’aujourd’hui, cet article permet de mieux apprehender les enjeux de definition et de legitimation rencontres actuellement par les professionnels du secteur de la gestion d’actifs. This article studies the Socially Responsible Investment (SRI)’s forms and purposes from the 1920s until today in the United States and Europe. Studying both SRI Funds’ theoretical background and features, it provides an overview of the different types of SRI funds according to their societal or economic background. In doing so, the article offers a better understanding of the complexity and the diversity of SRI and of the problems faced today by the asset management sector.

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)0.012
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207