La démocratisation de la finance au Québec : approches concurrentes, histoire contestée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’une typologie de trois conceptions de la démocratisation de la finance (rupture, symbiotique et interstitielle), cet article réinterprète les conflits ayant façonné l’histoire des institutions financières publiques et coopératives (IFPC) québécoises de 1960 à aujourd’hui. Pour chaque période, nous évaluons des projets de réformes et des institutions qui ont visé, soit, à socialiser la finance, à complémenter le secteur financier privé afin de l’améliorer de l’intérieur, ou à créer des espaces financiers qui échappent à la maximisation des profits. Méconnues, les luttes et revendications syndicales en faveur de la socialisation de la finance au Québec font ressortir les limites actuelles des IFPC associées notamment à la « finance solidaire et responsable ». Ce pan des conflits sociaux entourant la finance au Québec offre également des ressources afin de réimaginer la démocratisation de la finance en contexte québécois.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".