MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594481156

GILLES PRONOVOST E O FUTURO DA SOCIOLOGIA DO LAZER: ENTREVISTA

2016· article· pt· W2594481156 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luiz Octávio de Lima Camargo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Estudos do Lazer · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Sports Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyHumanismMeaning (existential)Sociology of leisurePragmatismOrder (exchange)HumanitiesGender studiesMedia studiesSocial sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophyEpistemologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The text brings an interview with Gilles Pronovost, made through emails about his main themes: leisure, social times, work, family and culture. In order to understand the meaning of Gilles Pronovost in the sociology of leisure, it is enough to remember that for Joffre Dumazedier, the most suitable country for a Brazilian researcher to start in the study of leisure was not France, his country, nor the United States, where he said he had remade his old academic formation in Letters, becoming sociologist, working with Lazarsfeld and Riesman, but the Quebec. He said that in this Canadian province, francophone but with strong ties with the surrounding anglophone community, leisure studies have the singularity of seeking a synthesis between European humanism and anglosaxon pragmatism and did not hesitate to highlight the protagonism of Gilles Pronovost, for his studies and the creation and direction of the Laboratory of Social Times of the University of Quebeca-Trois-Rivieres and the bilingual magazine Loisir $ Societe / Leisure $ Society. After Dumazedier's death, he joined Geoffrey Godbye in the USA, Robert Stebins in Canada, Chris Rojek in the United Kingdom, Lallive d'Pierpinay in Switzerland, Roger Sue and Jean Viard in France, in the gallery of leading leisure sociologists nowadays.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.341
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Estudos do LazerSame topicPhysical Education and Sports StudiesFrench-language works237,207