MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770514267 · doi:10.3917/rindu1.172.0082

La santé, élément commun des politiques publiques ? L’expérience canadienne

2017· article· fr· W2770514267 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eva Kehayia, Sara Ahmed, Philippe Archambault, Joyce Fung, Anouk Lamontagne, Bonnie Swaine, Dahlia Kairy, Guylaine Le Dorze, Hélène Lefebvre, Tiiu Poldma, Delphine Labbé

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales des Mines - Réalités industrielles · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMusée de la CivilisationConcordia UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mené par le CRIR et ses partenaires, le projet Laboratoire Vivant de Réadaptation, RehabMaLL, collabore à la création d’un environnement facilitant la participation et l’inclusion des personnes de tous âges, particulièrement de celles vivant avec des incapacités physiques, dans un centre commercial du centre-ville de Montréal. Hormis le partenaire principal, FPI COMINAR, propriétaire du centre commercial, le projet inclut des milieux communautaires et associatifs, cliniques, le privé, ainsi que des chercheurs et des industriels locaux, nationaux et internationaux. Cette initiative découle de l’engagement actif et de la synergie entre des chercheurs et des partenaires qui se sont donné pour but de faire disparaître les obstacles créés par des environnements physiques et sociaux discriminants. Cette transformation se réalise au travers de solutions innovantes et de stratégies visant la réduction des inégalités et la promotion de l’accessibilité, du bien-être et, par conséquent, de la santé des Québécois.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0200.032
Scholarly communication0.0170.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales des Mines - Réalités industriellesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207