MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quand l’accident survient… Le sauvetage-secourisme du travail, un instrument de gestion des risques au travail ? (1947-1969)

2018· article· fr· W3022555052 on OpenAlexaff
Charles-Antoine Wanecq

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire Politique · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsASTER
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccident (philosophy)Risk managementBusinessOperations managementPsychologyForensic engineeringEngineeringFinancePhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article se consacre au développement du secourisme au sein des dispositifs de gestion des risques au travail de la fin des années 1940 au tournant des années 1970. Alors que la prévention donne lieu à une réflexion dense, portée notamment en France par l’Institut national de sécurité, l’enseignement des gestes de premiers secours, relativement marginal, demeure aux mains des associations de secourisme. La Sécurité sociale comme les employeurs ont pourtant un intérêt financier et humain à réduire les risques engendrés par l’accident lui-même. L’article cherche donc à analyser le rôle du monde associatif dans l’élaboration de l’État social à travers l’exemple peu connu du sauvetage-secourisme du travail.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.182 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire PolitiqueSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207