MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2598331500 · doi:10.7202/1036627ar

Reconfiguration de l’espace productif contemporain : de la pertinence d’adapter les appareils juridiques et théoriques : Tremblay, Diane-Gabrielle (2015) Emploi et gestion des ressources humaines dans l’économie du savoir, Québec, PUQ, 380 p.Vultur, Mircea et Jean Bernier (dir.) (2014) Les agences de travail temporaire; leur rôle et leur fonctionnement comme intermédiaires du marché du travail, Québec, PUL, 282 p.D’Amours, Martine, Sid Ahmed Soussi et Diane-Gabrielle Tremblay (dir.) (2015) Repenser le travail. Des concepts nouveaux pour des réalités transformées, Québec, PUQ.

2016· article· fr· W2598331500 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marie-Pierre Bourdages-Sylvain

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La reconfiguration de l’espace productif suscite de nombreux débats quant à ses conséquences sur les collectifs de travail, mais également quant à la capacité des cadres théoriques industriels actuels à rendre compte des réalités contemporaines du monde du travail. En s’appuyant sur trois ouvrages récents, cette note critique vise à : 1) circonscrire les transformations socioéconomiques associées à l’économie du savoir au regard de l’emploi et de la gestion des ressources humaines ; 2) évaluer la nécessité d’adapter certains aspects des lois actuelles du travail afin d’assurer la protection juridique de tous les travailleurs québécois; et 3) s’interroger sur la capacité de la sociologie du travail à rendre compte de la complexité des mutations en cours.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.018
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueRecherches sociographiques→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→