MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618553769 · doi:10.4000/communication.3840

Les études critiques en management

2013· article· fr· W2618553769 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jean‐François Chanlat

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur fait d’abord appel aux racines de la pensée sociale critique. Il aborde ensuite la manière dont cette pensée s’est diffusée dans le champ des études des organisations et de la gestion de langue anglaise, les critical management studies (CMS). Enfin, il montre comment cette pensée a pénétré le champ d’études de langue française. En guise de conclusion, l’auteur rappelle l’importance de l’histoire, notamment celle des idées, dans le champ de la recherche et tout particulièrement dans les CMS, tant chez les chercheurs de langue anglaise que chez ceux de langue française.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0100.036
Scholarly communication0.0180.014
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicationSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207