MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125433378 · doi:10.3917/rdm.042.0407p

• LAVAL Christian , L’Homme économique. Essai surles racines du néolibéralisme , Gallimard, Paris, 2011, 416 p., 25,30 euros.

2013· article· fr· W7125433378 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Louis Moreau de Bellaing

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue du MAUSS · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityField (mathematics)Hippopotamus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’économie expérimentale traite abondamment de la confiance et de la réciprocité, y compris dans des interactions de court terme. Cependant, la plupart du temps, les expériences menées examinent dans un cadre défini à l’avance si les individus ont tendance à se faire confiance et s’ils sont payés en retour pour leur éventuel « investissement » en autrui. Cet article se propose d’explorer si l’adoption d’une stratégie qui vise à modifier délibérément les règles de l’interaction au profit de l’autre agent est susceptible d’être bénéfique. Le propos n’est plus de savoir s’il est raisonnable d’accorder sa confiance à son interlocuteur mais devient plutôt d’agir de manière à lui inspirer confiance. À partir de là, une expérience particulièrement simple, fondée sur les travaux de Tversky et Shafir, s’efforcera de vérifier si la sécurisation des attentes de l’autre individu se traduit par une forme de reconnaissance de sa part et peut favoriser l’apparition de comportements qui reposent davantage sur la coopération.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.248
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
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue du MAUSSSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207