Les relations affectives et sexuelles des jeunes en situation de rue : entre investissement et désinvestissement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les relations affectives et sexuelles des jeunes en situation de rue sont souvent examinées sous l’angle de la survie, sans toutefois prendre en considération leurs différentes expériences subjectives. À partir de travaux sociologiques qui mettent en avant le pouvoir d’action des individus sur leurs conditions de vie, cet article vise à documenter les représentations des relations affectives et sexuelles des jeunes en situation de rue à Montréal. Des entrevues semi-dirigées ont été réalisées auprès de vingt-sept jeunes en situation de rue (16 femmes ; 11 hommes) âgés de 18 à 25 ans. L’analyse qualitative des témoignages montre que, pour certains participants, l’investissement des relations affectives et sexuelles participe à la construction de leur sentiment d’appartenance à la situation de rue. De leur côté, d’autres participants rapportent désinvestir les relations affectives et sexuelles afin de limiter toute attache susceptible de compromettre leur sortie de la situation de rue. Cette étude met en lumière la dimension stratégique des relations affectives et sexuelles par laquelle les jeunes tentent d’améliorer leurs conditions de vie en situation de rue.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".