MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099513029 · doi:10.3917/eh.100.0085

Y a-t-il des invariants en management ?

2020· article· fr· W3099513029 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntreprises et histoire · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article s’intéresse à l’existence d’invariants en management. L’invariance est une notion bien connue des sciences dures et de certaines sciences sociales. Elle qualifie ce qui demeure constant sous l’effet de transformations. Poser la question de l’existence d’invariants en management est, à notre connaissance, inédit. Cela est même anachronique. Pourtant cela présente l’intérêt de questionner les définitions de l’activité managériale, ce que nous faisons dans cet article. Il émerge de cette analyse des invariants définitionnels. Nous les présentons et nous montrons qu’ils ont beaucoup structuré la pensée du management. D’autres formes d’invariants en management peuvent néanmoins être repérées : invariants typologiques, de principe, et axiomatiques, que nous mettons en lumière également dans cette recherche.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.208 · 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