MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159786770 · doi:10.7202/1076542ar

Le loisir comme facteur d’intégration sociale pour les nouveaux arrivants : étude de cas centrée sur certains arrondissements de Montréal

2021· article· fr· W3159786770 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jean-Marc Adjizian, Romain Roult, Bob W. White, Denis Auger

Bibliographic record

VenueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinaires · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confrontés depuis plusieurs années à différents enjeux de société liés à l’intégration des nouveaux arrivants, le gouvernement du Québec et de nombreux acteurs locaux tentent par diverses initiatives de faciliter leur intégration. Cette recherche exploratoire vise à analyser la relation entre le loisir et l’intégration sociale des nouveaux arrivants dans un contexte interculturel. Cette recherche qualitative est fondée sur la conduite de 13 entrevues auprès de professionnels du loisir de sept arrondissements montréalais. L’analyse de ces entretiens permet entre autres de mettre en lumière les difficultés de communication auxquelles font face les professionnels en loisir lorsqu’ils travaillent avec ce type de population, le besoin de partenariats afin de mieux cerner les besoins des nouveaux arrivants, l’importance du bénévolat comme facteur d’intégration et de développement de la confiance en soi, ainsi que la participation du loisir dans la compréhension des référents et codes sociaux de la société d’accueil.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnjeux et société Approches transdisciplinairesSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207