MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999301480 · doi:10.1522/revueot.v28n2.1052

Retour vers le futur de l’échange marchand

2019· article· fr· W2999301480 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Myriam Ertz, Damien Hallegate, Julien Bousquet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Organisations & territoires · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article vise à présenter les contributions majeures de l’ouvrage collectif intitulé Les reconfigurationsde l’échange marchand : Tour d’horizon, enjeux et perspectives, publié aux Presses universitaires du Québec etdirigé par les professeurs Myriam Ertz, Julien Bousquet et Damien Hallegatte. D’après l’ensemble des collaborateurs de cet ouvrage, l’échange marchand est en mutation profonde. Cette métamorphose a résulté en quatre grandes évolutions : une conceptualisation revue de l’échange marchand, l’émergence de devisesd’échanges alternatives, la réactualisation du produit aux coeur d’échange reconfigurés, et la quête de sens dans la consommation. Si les causes de ces évolutions sont assez difficiles à isoler de manière précise, il n’endemeure pas moins que cette modification en profondeur de la manière dont fonctionne le marché résulte dela convergence de trois tendances lourdes : les évolutions technologiques, les évolutions socioculturelles, et lescontraintes économico-financières. Cet article résume ainsi les domaines de changement ainsi que les causesde changement tel qu’identifié par les auteurs de l’ouvrage collectif.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Organisations & territoiresSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207