MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293159185 · doi:10.3917/recma.343.0103

La finalité des coopératives bancaires : un avantage pour attirer de futurs diplômés

2017· article· fr· W4293159185 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Claude Beaudin, Michel Séguin

Bibliographic record

VenueRECMA · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Strategy and Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolecular biologyGynecologyBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En tant que coopérative, la coopérative financière a comme finalité de satisfaire au maximum ses membres-clients alors que l’entreprise classique vise la maximisation des bénéfices. Les candidats disponibles sur le marché de l’emploi sont-ils sensibles à la finalité poursuivie par les entreprises lorsqu’ils décident de poser leur candidature ? Le cas échéant, est-ce que la satisfaction de la clientèle est une finalité plus attractive que la maximisation des bénéfices ? Cet article présente les résultats d’une étude effectuée auprès d’étudiants d’une école de commerce. Les résultats confirment l’hypothèse que la finalité de l’entreprise influence l’attractivité organisationnelle et que la finalité coopérative est plus attractive que celle d’une banque traditionnelle.

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), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRECMASame topicBusiness Strategy and InnovationFrench-language works237,207