La transition écologique : apports de la science de l’occupation et de l’éthique épicurienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article défend l’idée suivant laquelle le concept de justice occupationnelle intergénérationnelle a le potentiel de soutenir l’éducation relative à l’environnement nécessaire à la transition écologique. Après avoir précisé l’apport de la science de l’occupation et celui de l’éthique épicurienne à la réflexion sur la transition écologique, le concept de justice occupationnelle intergénérationnelle est introduit et défini, de même que les autres concepts occupationnels qui lui sont liés (besoins, désirs, droits, devoirs et choix occupationnels) et ce, avant de spécifier comment ce nouveau concept peut soutenir l’éducation relative à l’environnement. Autrement dit, cet article développe une réflexion éthique, par l’entremise du concept de justice occupationnelle intergénérationnelle pour penser la transition écologique et l’éducation relative à l’environnement requise pour s’y engager à la fois individuellement et collectivement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".