Le projet Dauphine : laisser la parole aux jeunes femmes de la rue et agir ensemble pour lutter contre la violence structurelle par l’entremise de la recherche-action participative1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que l’intersectionnalité est devenue, selon l’expression employée par Kathy Davis, un véritable « buzzword » dans le champ des études féministes, plusieurs questionnements persistent quant à son utilisation pour valoriser la parole des femmes marginalisées et l’inclure dans les pratiques sociales. Les auteures présentent une recherche-action participative réalisée auprès d’un groupe de sept jeunes femmes de la rue de la région de Québec, sur le thème de la violence structurelle. Une analyse du processus, à partir des critères de scientificité de la recherche-action participative, montre la manière dont les participantes se sont engagées dans la réflexion sur leur expérience de la violence structurelle et dans l’expérimentation de stratégies pour la prévenir ou la surmonter ou encore y résister.
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 | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".