MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999567241

Coûts des lésions professionnelles

2015· article· fr· W6999567241 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation scientistPulpitTrade union
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les lésions professionnelles sont coûteuses à plus d’un titre. Elles sont coûteuses pour les entreprises, mais aussi pour l’ensemble de la société. Les montants versés par la CSST — les débours — ne représentent qu’une partie des coûts totaux engendrés par les lésions professionnelles. Pour obtenir un portrait global de la situation, il faut estimer tout l’ensemble des coûts financiers et humains qui sont assumés par les travailleurs, les employeurs et la collectivité. Cette fiche présente les coûts des lésions, le siège et la nature des lésions, le genre d’accident ou d’exposition et les agents causaux. Pour en savoir plus : consulter le site Web statistiques.irsst.qc.ca

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.014

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207