MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134010395 · doi:10.3917/retm.310.0063

Négocier l’« autonomie »

2020· article· fr· W3134010395 on OpenAlex
Peter Warrian, Alain Thomasset

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

VenueRevue d éthique et de théologie morale · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Technology and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article étudie l’impact de l’IA sur le travail et les formes d’organisation des productions industrielles, en particulier dans les mines où elle prend principalement la forme de l’apprentissage automatique (par exemple les camions de transport minier robotisés). À l’aide d’une étude de cas, il examine quelques questions éthiques posées par ces stratégies numériques : leur impact sur l’emploi, l’usage du concept d’autonomie, la nouvelle répartition des gains avec les nouveaux acteurs du numérique, la justice vis-à-vis des communautés locales. L’impact principal des centres d’opérations à distance se portera en particulier sur les communautés locales autochtones et notamment sur la gestion de l’eau.

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)0.002
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 score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.256 · 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