MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7048600650

Le Chic Resto Pop: une entreprise communautaire et d'insertion

2008· other· fr· W7048600650 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2008
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaFusible alloyArticular cartilage damage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette monographie du Chic Resto Pop a été réalisée dans le cadre d'une recherche intitulée «Développement communautaire, économie sociale et entreprises d'insertion sociale», recherche subventionnée par le CRSH et réalisée sous la direction de Louis Favreau, Benoit Lévesque,Yvan Comeau, Marie-Claire Malo et Carol Saucier dans cinq régions du Québec soit l'Est du Québec, Montréal, l'Outaouais, la Montérégie et Québec. Cette monographie s'inscrit dans le cadre général du Collectif de recherche sur les innovations sociales dans les syndicats et les entreprises, le collectif CRISES. CRISES réalise depuis un certain nombre d'années des études de cas visant à cerner les initiatives de la nouvelle économie sociale telles les entreprises communautaires et coopératives poursuivant tout à la fois des objectifs sociaux (d'insertion, de création d'emplois ou de revitalisation d'un milieu) et des objectifs économiques. Au plan méthodologique, chaque monographie est réalisée à partir d'une grille, la «grille de collecte et de catégorisation des données pour l'étude d'activités de l'économie sociale» d'Yvan Comeau (Comeau, CRISES, UQAM, 1996, 13 pages).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)→Same topicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research→French-language works237,207→