MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750991825 · doi:10.3917/drs.096.0273

Between the Law and the Case: Making Sense of Labor Inspectors’ Responses to Workplace Risks in Brazil

2017· article· fr· W2750991825 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Rocha Coelho Pires

Bibliographic record

VenueDroit et société · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, il s’agit de discuter la gestion des risques au travail à travers une analyse centrée sur le travail réalisé par les inspecteurs du travail. Appuyé sur une recherche approfondie sur l’Inspection du Travail au Brésil, on révèle deux modes implicites de production et de justification du travail d’inspection – « la défense fiscale » et « l’ingénierie sociale ». Ces modes médiatisent la transformation des lois abstraites en des cas concrets d’inspection. Ils sont examinés en fonction de leurs propriétés concernant la réduction de l’incertitude et la légitimation des actions d’inspection, et répercussions sur des approches de gestion des risques nettement différenciées – basées sur la durabilité financière du système ou sur le développement d’incitations à la prévention des risques dans les relations locales de production.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDroit et sociétéSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207