La construction des savoirs sur le contrôle financier des régimes de retraite au Québec et les enjeux de l'action collective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte vise à présenter un programme de recherche sur la régulation des régimes de\nretraite au Québec à travers trois moments de la recherche : 1) la construction des savoirs\npar l'analyse des régimes de retraite comme investisseurs institutionnels ; 2) Une étude de\ncas emblématique des transformations récentes de la régulation des régimes de retraite au\nQuébec sous l'effet de la financiarisation, ainsi que des enjeux de cette transformation pour\nla régulation par l'action collective des syndicats et des administrations publiques ; 3) Une\nanalyse des enjeux de la documentation de place de l'action syndicale dans la régulation\ndes régimes de retraite au Québec. En présentant ce programme de recherche, il s'agit de\nmontrer les liens entre les recherches théoriques et les recherches empiriques, les\ncommunautés de recherche qui ont structuré la construction des connaissances, ainsi que\nles liens entre les transformations institutionnelles et l'action collective.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".