MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2773485765 · doi:10.7202/1040270ar

Réflexions sur les contours flous des limites entre travail domestique et servitude

2017· article· fr· W2773485765 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Bethany Hastie, Alexis Martig

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bien que l’usage du concept de servitude dans la définition légale internationale de la traite des personnes illustre un intérêt renouvelé pour celui-ci, il demeure flou et indéfini. Cet article s’efforce d’apporter un éclairage nouveau sur les significations contemporaines qui peuvent être attribuées à la servitude domestique dans la loi internationale, tout en réfléchissant à la nature floue des frontières entre le travail domestique et la servitude. Cet article s’appuie sur le Programme des aides familiaux du Canada (AF) comme étude de cas pour montrer comment ces frontières floues sont constituées, notamment du fait des dispositions légales qui encadrent l’AF, en faisant valoir que le permis de travail lié à un employeur donné, articulé à la nature privée et isolée du lieu de travail, crée des vulnérabilités qui rendent plus probables l’émergence des conditions de servitude.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.048
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et Sociétés→Same topicSex work and related issues→French-language works237,207→