MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

« On choisit son économie, pas sa société ». Transition et pensée économique au Québec

2022· article· fr· W4283725872 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul Sabourin, Frédéric Parent

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventions économiques · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspiré de l’analyse originale de Gilles Dostaler sur les transitions dans l’histoire de la pensée économique, cet article montre que les premiers penseurs de l’économie québécoise percevaient leur objet comme un phénomène localisé dans le temps et l’espace et non comme un phénomène universel. À partir d’une sociologie de la connaissance économique, nous ferons état des continuités entre, d’une part, la configuration sociale des pratiques économiques et de la connaissance qui en est constitutive et, d’autre part, les apports originaux des premiers penseurs de l’économie québécoise qui vont confronter ces savoirs de leur société aux savoirs dominants en sciences économiques. En examinant les traits marquants des travaux des Parent, Gérin-Lajoie, Gérin, Montpetit et Minville, comme ceux d’économistes québécois contemporains comme Dostaler, nous constatons, en plus de la genèse hétérodoxe de la connaissance de l’économie canadienne-française, des tentatives de redéfinition des sciences économiques sur de nouvelles bases utiles pour appréhender la « transition » écologique.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.349
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

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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventions économiquesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207