Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'implication de l’Etat dans la vie privee pose probleme : les individus ont davantage de droits que par le passe, mais certains de leurs comportements, juges problematiques pour la collectivite, justifient un interventionnisme renouvele, dans lequel acteurs prives et mecanismes de marche occupent une place croissante. En tension entre liberalisme et normalisation, cette action publique participe aux recompositions des rapports sociaux, entre les classes sociales, entre les genres, ainsi qu’entre la population majoritaire et les personnes racisees. Objet de vifs debats et de reformes recurrentes, la regulation par le droit des separations conjugales est un observatoire precieux de ces recompositions, ici analysees a partir de trois enquetes collectives, qualitatives et quantitatives, menees des deux cotes de l’Atlantique. En France comme au Quebec, l’acces aux procedures, les interactions avec les professionel.les et l’encadrement des modes de vie sont les trois dimensions constitutives du gouvernement de la vie privee. Cependant, chacun des contextes n’articule pas de la meme maniere inegalites de classe et inegalites de genre. En scrutant la production institutionnelle des inegalites privees, cet ouvrage invite a imaginer des voies alternatives, dans la sphere privee comme dans la sphere publique, pour que la politique des droits tienne ses promesses emancipatrices. [Resume editeur]
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".