MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170682045 · doi:10.3138/ttr.42.1.53

Consommation marchande, bien-être et différenciation sociale

2021· article· fr· W3170682045 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simon Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Tocqueville Review/La revue Tocqueville · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les ménages obtiennent les biens et services nécessaires au bien-être de leurs membres en bonne partie dans la sphère marchande. La marchandisation des biens et des services est désormais largement étendue, bien que le bien-être ne se réduise pas à la consommation marchande. Depuis 1969, les enquêtes budgétaires canadiennes permettent d’évaluer les comportements de consommation ainsi que la structure des besoins des ménages (régression du poids de l’alimentation et hausse du poids des postes transports, logement, loisirs et culture, protection et dépenses diverses). L’analyse de la différenciation transversale et temporelle des comportements de consommation entre classes socioéconomiques révèle que les ménages aisés accroissent leurs efforts budgétaires plus rapidement que les ménages pauvres et de classes moyennes inférieures pour les dépenses discrétionnaires et afin de satisfaire de nouveaux besoins. Quand un poste de consommation augmente rapidement lorsque le revenu des ménages s’accroît sur une longue période, il est plus différencié socialement, tel qu’illustré par l’évolution des dépenses pour le logement ou les transports.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Tocqueville Review/La revue TocquevilleSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207