MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951601777 · doi:10.4000/books.ies.2152

Quels liens entre recherche et travail social ?

2018· book-chapter· fr· W2951601777 on OpenAlexaff
Claudio Bolzman

Bibliographic record

VenueÉditions ies eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Labour, Employment and Social Solidarity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question des liens possibles entre recherche et travail social fait débat, notamment dans le monde francophone. Ainsi, lors de la Conférence de consensus qui a eu lieu en France en 2012, il était question de savoir si l’on devait développer la recherche « dans, sur ou en travail social » (Jaeger & Mispelblom Beyer, 2014), comme s’il s’agissait de positions exclusives et inconciliables. Dans le même sens, il m’est arrivé aussi de rencontrer des collègues pour qui la seule recherche légitime...

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.079
Scholarly communication0.0320.035
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉditions ies eBooksSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207