MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908316038 · doi:10.3917/pox.122.0079

Tirer parti de l’ordre établi ?

2018· article· fr· W2908316038 on OpenAlexaff
Amélie Beaumont

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitix · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir d’une ethnographie d’un hôtel de luxe et de ses employés, cet article contribue à l’étude de la place du travail dans la formation du rapport au politique. J’analyse deux matrices de socialisation repérées sur ce terrain. La première, puissante, prend racine dans l’organisation du travail et des carrières : l’attachement au fonctionnement traditionnel du secteur imprime chez les employés des dispositions conservatrices de l’ordre établi. Ces visions du monde, profondément intériorisées, sont cependant peu converties en prises de position politiques explicites. La seconde matrice est issue du travail de politisation du rapport salarial par le syndicat. Le sentiment de vulnérabilité des employés face aux changements imposés par la direction les conduit à soutenir la CGT locale, malgré leur réticence vis-à-vis des syndicats. Mais les opinions politiques contestataires défendues par la section entrent en conflit avec les dispositions entretenues par la première matrice. L’influence respective de ces deux socialisations dépend finalement du contexte de travail et des trajectoires antérieures des employés, générant des oppositions entre salariés mais aussi des tensions à l’échelle individuelle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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 head0.373
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitixSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207