MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389182726 · doi:10.19088/core.2023.004

Informalité et groupes marginalisés dans la réponse aux crises

2023· report· fr· W4389182726 on OpenAlexfundno aff
R Charles Price

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les répercussions de la pandémie de Covid-19 s’étendent au-delà de la crise sanitaire dans les domaines économiques, sociaux et politiques. Mais elles n’ont pas touché tout le monde de façon uniforme. Les inégalités sociétales existantes sont exacerbées ainsi que la marginalisation. Les travailleurs informels et migrants, et ceux qui vivent dans des établissements informels, sont touchés de manière disproportionnée par les effets sanitaires et secondaires de la pandémie. Cela a eu un impact supplémentaire sur leurs moyens de subsistance et leur capacité à répondre aux besoins fondamentaux, et a aussi limité leur capacité à se rétablir en raison des stratégies d’adaptation qu’ils ont dû adopter. Dans le même temps, le succès de la réduction des risques de catastrophe (RRC) dépend souvent d’acteurs et de réseaux informels. Les limites des systèmes formels de gouvernance des catastrophes ont fait l’objet de nombreuses discussions. Les lacunes sont largement associées au manque de connaissances (locales), de compréhension contextuelle, d’incitations, de systèmes de coordination ou de flexibilité. De plus, l’accent est souvent mis sur les solutions infrastructurelles et technocratiques plutôt que sur l’établissement de relations avec les ressources locales existantes. Malgré cela, les approches de gestion des catastrophes à court terme et à risque unique continuent de dominer.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207