The worth of the social economy : an international perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contents: Marie J. Bouchard: Introduction. The Worth of the Social Economy - Marie J. Bouchard: Methods and Indicators for Evaluating the Social Economy - Bernard Perret: Evaluating the Social Economy. Clarifying Complex Rationality - Bernard Enjolras: The Public Policy Paradox. Normative Foundations of Social Economy and Public Policies. Which Consequences for Evaluation Strategies? - Bernard Eme: Miseries and Worth of the Evaluation of the Social and Solidarity-based Economy. For a Paradigm of Communicational Evaluation - Nadine Richez-Battesti/Helene Trouve/Francois Rousseau/Bernard Eme/Laurent Fraisse: Evaluating the Social and Solidarity-Based Economy in France. Societal Balance Sheet-Social Utility and Identity Trial - Marie J. Bouchard: The Evaluation of the Social Economy in Quebec, with regard to Stakeholders, Mission and Organizational Identity - Roger Spear: Social Accounting and Social Audit in the UK - Charles Patrick Rock: Evaluating Nonprofit Organizations in the United States Welfare System - Mauricio Serva/Carolina Andion/Lucila Campos/Erika Onozato: Evaluation of the Social Economy in Brazil. An Analysis of the Practices in some NGOs - Isabel Nicolau/Ana Simaens: The Evaluation of Social Solidarity Organizations in the Portuguese Context - Akira Kurimoto: Evaluation of Co-operative Performances and Specificities in Japan - Marie J. Bouchard/Nadine Richez-Battesti: Conclusions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".