MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203810688 · doi:10.3917/graph1.hs014.0087

Modèle humanimal de pratique en médiation animale – zoothérapie. Où mettre nos pas dans l’empreinte de leurs pattes ouvre sur de nouveaux possibles

2021· article· fr· W3203810688 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuelle Fournier Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueSociographe · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans certaines pratiques anthropocentrées en médiation animale, l’animal non-humain est encore considéré comme un « outil au service de l’Homme » plutôt qu’un partenaire à l’intervention. Cette instrumentalisation le met à risque de vivre de l’abus en plus de possiblement limiter la portée de l’intervention. La reconnaissance de l’agentivité de l’animal non-humain semble donc nécessaire pour libérer le véritable potentiel et ainsi accéder à la richesse de la médiation animale. À l’aide d’illustrations cliniques, l’auteur présente le Modèle humanimal de pratique en médiation animale – zoothérapie qu’elle a développé, un dispositif permettant d’embrasser ce changement de paradigme.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociographeSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207