MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386844856 · doi:10.19088/core.2023.013

Les récupérateur·trice·s de déchets font partie de la solution à la gestion des déchets solides au Sénégal

2023· report· fr· W4386844856 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Olga Abizaid, Maguette Diop, Adama Soumaré, Emilie Wilson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les récupérateur·trice·s de déchets de l’organisation Bokk Diom travaillant à la décharge de Mbeubeuss de Dakar, dans la capital du Sénégal, ont fourni des services essentiels de gestion des déchets pendant la pandémie de la Covid-19, contribuant à la santé publique, la réduction des impacts environnementaux et à l’atténuation des gaz à effet de serre. Comme pour beaucoup, leurs revenus ont été affectés par la pandémie, en particulier pour les femmes. Mais la plus grande menace pour leurs revenus et leurs moyens de subsistance est la transformation du système de gestion des déchets, qui ne les inclut pas. En s’appuyant sur les résultats de la recherche menée avec Femmes dans l’Emploi Informel : Globalisation et Organisation (WIEGO) pendant la pandémie, Bokk Diom a été capable de plaider en faveur des récupérateur·trice·s et obtenir des autorités nationales des promesses d’inclusion dans la gestion des déchets solides (GDS). Bokk Diom et WIEGO continuent avec leurs efforts pour aboutir à une transition juste pour les récupérateur·trice·s.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.206
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→