MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322588023 · doi:10.7202/1095492ar

La gestion par résultats au sein du tribunal administratif du travail

2023· article· fr· W4322588023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLex Electronica · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article porte sur les influences du nouveau management public sur le droit administratif québécois, particulièrement sur la gestion du Tribunal Administratif du Travail. Depuis les réformes administratives des années 2000, divers mécanismes et outils de gestion relevant de l’approche du nouveau management public et de la gestion par résultats ont été mis en place au sein de l’administration publique québécoise. Il s’agit d’emprunter des sciences managériales, afin de permettre aux gestionnaires de prendre les décisions les plus efficaces et performantes dans les circonstances. Cet article met en lumière les influences de ce changement dans l’organisation de l’administration publique québécoise, et ce, afin de mieux en comprendre les implications de celui-ci pour le droit administratif. Ces réflexions permettront ainsi de mieux comprendre comment ces outils managériaux interagissent avec le droit administratif, à savoir si le droit administratif a été acculturé par le management.

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.007

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.345 · 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