Bibliographic record
Abstract
S’appuyant sur les nombreuses négociations autour du travail dominical dans le secteur du commerce, cet article a pour objectif d’observer comment les logiques de qualification des salariés s’y renouvellent. La qualification est le produit d’un rapport de forces qui s’actualise constamment au cours des conflits et des négociations au sein des entreprises. Or le travail dominical est une exigence grandissante de la part des employeurs dans le commerce : il devient un enjeu de négociations et de luttes dans un secteur où la qualification des emplois est rarement reconnue. Les accords conclus en 2016 dans les entreprises sur le travail dominical instaurent non seulement un statut d’emploi d’appoint pour les travailleurs du week-end mais participent aussi à la redéfinition de la qualification de l’ensemble des employés du commerce. En reposant sur une individualisation accrue des pratiques temporelles et de la rémunération, le recours croissant au travail dominical fragilise le collectif de travail et renforce les inégalités entre les salariés.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".