MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753330418 · doi:10.4000/conflits.19444

La face cachée d’un groupe professionnel

2017· article· fr· W2753330418 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCultures & conflits/Cultures et conflits · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNight-time city culture
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir du cas des concierges d’hôtels de luxe, cet article cherche à examiner comment faire du travail de nuit l’objet d’une sociologie des groupes professionnels qui échappe aux pièges d’une catégorisation essentialiste ou relativiste de la « nuit ». Il articule différentes temporalités observées à différentes échelles d’analyse. D’abord, l’échelle microsociologique des tâches quotidiennes est saisie par les outils de la sociologie du travail. Ensuite, l’échelle des trajectoires professionnelles est vue à travers la perspective de la sociologie de l’emploi. Enfin l’échelle plus large du groupe professionnel est abordée sous l’angle de la sociologie des mobilisations collectives. Ces trois étapes montrent toutes que la marginalité des concierges de nuit dessine en réalité la face cachée du groupe dans son entier. Leur prise en compte dans l’analyse, qui oblige le sociologue à élargir son périmètre d’enquête et à se faire en quelque sorte nyctalope, est dès lors indispensable.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.316 · 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