MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127918888 · doi:10.3917/gap.173.0115d

Fabien Desage, Nicolas Sallée, Dominique Duprez (dir.) (2015) , Le Contrôle des jeunes déviants , Montréal, Presses universitaires de Montréal

2017· article· fr· W7127918888 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Juliette Soissons

Bibliographic record

VenueGouvernement et action publique · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Quality (philosophy)Production (economics)Power (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir de l’exemple de la présidence de Nicolas Sarkozy (2007-2012), cet article étudie le lien entre les politiques promises aux électeurs lors de la campagne et celles qui sont effectivement mises en œuvre pendant le quinquennat. Face au décalage entre les théories du mandat représentatif et les résultats des travaux sur l’influence des partis sur les politiques publiques, nous adoptons une approche différente, centrée sur les promesses électorales. À partir d’un recensement systématique des promesses présentes dans le programme électoral de Nicolas Sarkozy, nous retraçons le devenir de chaque promesse, puis nous cherchons à identifier des types de promesses mieux tenues. Si un peu plus de la moitié des 164 promesses présentes dans le programme de Nicolas Sarkozy de 2007 ont été tenues, certains types de promesses sont mieux respectés que d’autres. C’est notamment le cas des engagements formulés précisément, ainsi que de ceux qui annoncent la mise en œuvre d’un moyen, plutôt que la réalisation d’un objectif.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGouvernement et action publiqueSame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207