MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905766883 · doi:10.3917/inso.196.0051

Recompositions des valeurs et référentiels des politiques familiales

2018· article· fr· W2905766883 on OpenAlexaff
Claude Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueInformations sociales · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Vieille-Capitale
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’objectif de cet article est de relire l’histoire de la politique familiale en France pour repérer des redéfinitions, des reformulations, des recadrages des questions familiales à traiter et de ce fait des ruptures, des réorientations, des tournants. Il propose de distinguer pour cela un certain nombre de « référentiels » (combinant idées, normes et valeurs) qui ont guidé ces réorientations au fil du temps comme le familialisme ou l’individualisme. Il fait l’hypothèse de l’émergence d’un parentalisme qui se combine avec des logiques d’universalité ou de ciblage.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformations socialesSame topicSocial Policies and FamilyFrench-language works237,207