MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210326125 · doi:10.7202/057515ar

Femmes, développement et idéologie : un cas au Mexique

2005· article· fr· W4210326125 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marie France Labrecque

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches féministes · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Humanities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En 1971, la Loi fédérale de Réforme agraire prévoyait la mise sur pied des Unités Agricoles et Industrielles pour les Femmes (UAIM). Il a fallu néanmoins attendre près de dix années pour que ce programme de développement prenne véritablement son essor. En examinant la formulation de la Loi de même que la façon dont le programme a été appliqué par les fonctionnaires des ministères responsables, il est possible de déterminer que dès sa gestation il a été chargé de domination masculine. Les données illustrant ce phénomène proviennent de la campagne du nord du Yucatân et permettent de parler de la domination masculine institutionnalisée.

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)0.002
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.370
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.085 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches féministesSame topicSocial Sciences and HumanitiesFrench-language works237,207