Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article discute des implications du Salaire minimum garanti pour les femmes qui font face a des inegalites systemiques, surtout celles qui sont des aidantes. L’auteure se penche sur les pieges presents dans les services publics traditionnels qui, assure-t-elle, sont inadequats en raison de leur corporatisme. L’auteure ajoute que la notion qui perdure a savoir que le travail familial et celui dans la communaute n’a aucune valeur, (Waring) ce qui a mene a une defranchisation economique et sociale des femmes. Le salaire minimum pour les femmes veut reconnaitre la valeur de la productivite et du « care », donc de reduire l’insecurite economique des femmes. De plus, l’auteure assure que cet apport reduirait la violence faite aux femmes qui pourraient acceder aux droits humains, de cette facon, accederaient a l’autodetermination (leur capacite de faire des choix plus eclaires). En conclusion, l’auteure enumere des etapes a suivre a commencer par le salaire minimum garanti en vue de creer une societe plus paisible et plus stable.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.001 |
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.
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".