MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991821079 · doi:10.7202/1066093ar

Le café des mères et l’atelier des femmes

2019· article· fr· W2991821079 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linda Haapajärvi

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En étudiant la mise en oeuvre des politiques d’intégration participatives au sein d’une maison de quartier à Paris et d’une autre à Helsinki, cet article s’interroge sur la manière dont un lien de citoyenneté plus solide est tissé entre les femmes migrantes et la société française et finlandaise. L’observation in situ au coeur des dispositifs participatifs du café des mères à Helsinki et de l’atelier d’écriture à Paris montre que, bien que les politiques d’intégration participatives poursuivent officiellement des objectifs similaires, elles produisent en pratique un attachement civique de nature différente cantonné aux cadres normatifs du maternalisme et de la citoyenneté communautaire dans le premier cas, et à du féminisme et de la citoyenneté politique dans le second. Confrontée à l’insuffisance du cadre interprétatif des « modèles d’intégration » nationaux, cette recherche examine la variation des trois techniques du « travail d’attachement » que déploient les agents de terrain à la lumière d’éléments explicatifs locaux, comme la trajectoire des institutions et l’organisation des dispositifs comparés. Elle identifie comme apport principal de l’ethnographie aux comparaisons internationales la possibilité de développer des analyses multiniveaux et des comparaisons partielles, mais réalistes.

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)0.002
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207