MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Développement et inclusion. Vers un agenda social innovant en Amérique Latine

2016· article· fr· W2548197184 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Chalmers Larose

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventions économiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article traite des effets sociaux de la croissance économique. Il dresse un panorama général de la relation complexe entre croissance économique, inégalités et pauvreté, à partir d’une exploration approfondie de la situation au sein des pays de l’Amérique Latine, en particulier le Brésil. Le texte établit le rôle crucial des inégalités sociales initiales comme tremplin et filtre nécessaire établissant la connexion entre croissance économique et réduction de la pauvreté. L’évolution tendancielle et relative de la croissance, et ses effets possibles ou potentiels, sur la réduction des inégalités et de la pauvreté dans la région, y est explorée et étudiée à travers le prisme des politiques mises en place par les pays concernés. Certaines politiques publiques distributives et correctrices, notamment le renforcement de l’appareil de sécurité sociale, et surtout les transferts monétaires conditionnés vers les catégories sociales les plus pauvres, font l’objet d’une attention soutenue. Dans un tel contexte, l’adoption préalable de politiques et stratégies de réduction des inégalités s’avère être un chantier politique fertile afin de mener un combat effectif contre la pauvreté au sein des économies émergentes d’Amérique Latine.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventions économiquesSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207