L’accompagnement des demandeurs d’emploi longue durée post-formation. Quels sont les effets du suivi à distance ou physique et du soutien perçu sur le retour à l’emploi ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'accompagnement des demandeurs d'emploi longue dure post-formation. Quels sont les effets du suivi distance ou physique et du soutien peru sur le retour l'emploi ? Formation et profession 31(1) 2023 1 sum Les demandeurs d' emploi de longue dure (DELD) voient leur chance de retrouver un travail s'amoindrir au fur mesure que leur dure de non-emploi crot. En France, seuls 43 % d' entre eux parviennent retrouver un travail aprs avoir suivi une formation. Nous enqutons sur les facteurs favorisant le soutien peru lors de l'accompagnement ainsi que le retour l' emploi par le biais d'une mthodologie d' enqute mixte. Nous dmontrons le rle central de l'accompagnement frquent et physique sur le soutien peru, qui favorise son tour le retour l' emploi. Ce sentiment de soutien favorise la motivation, la confiance et la persvrance du DELD, en vue de retrouver un emploi.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.004 |
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".