Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il y a six ans, deux initiatives concomitantes jetaient les bases d’une coordination syndicale européenne visant à desserrer la contrainte nouvelle que l’unification monétaire et la concurrence au sein de l’UE faisaient peser sur la négociation collective. Lancées hors du cadre communautaire, la déclaration de Doorn, signée par le DGB, et la Résolution de Francfort initiée par IG Metall ont essaimé au point de faire entrer la « négociation salariale transnationale » dans l’agenda européen. Cela n’a pas empêché le partage de la richesse entre les salariés et leurs employeurs de continuer à évoluer en défaveur des premiers. Dans ce contexte, la coordination syndicale européenne, dans laquelle les syndicats allemands continuent de jouer un rôle moteur, peut se comprendre comme une mesure d’accompagnement du rattrapage compétitif que connaît l’Allemagne depuis la fin des années 1990. Les syndicats ont investi le champ politique européen avec un certain pragmatisme avant tout dans le dessein de protéger leur modèle.1
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".