MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404780053 · doi:10.3917/entin.062.0005

Placing care and hospitality at the heart of entrepreneurial support

2024· article· fr· W4404780053 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntreprendre & Innover · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faut-il déconstruire et revisiter la notion et les pratiques de soutien que sous-tend l’accompagnement entrepreneurial ? C’est la question que nous avons soumise aux collègues praticiens et enseignants-chercheurs réunis lors de la troisième édition de notre workshop autour des approches critiques de l’accompagnement entrepreneurial. En effet, après avoir débattu ensemble, sous cet angle critique, des structures d’accompagnement en 2018 à l’UCLouvain (Belgique), puis du processus d’accompagnement en 2019 à l’Université Laval (Québec), il nous a semblé intéressant pour l’édition de 2024 à l’ESSCA School of Management (Bordeaux, France) d’interroger la notion de soutien, censée être au cœur d’une démarche d’accompagnement. Cette interrogation s’inscrit dans le prolongement des travaux menés depuis 2020 par plusieurs chercheurs 1 soulignant que le soutien (support) est devenu un mot-valise utilisé pour embrasser une grande diversité d’initiatives du monde entrepreneurial et que ce soutien est encore trop souvent réduit à sa seule composante « technico-matérielle ».

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.273 · 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