Bibliographic record
Abstract
De nos jours, les villes sont le spectacle du mouvement perpétuel des citadins dans leur quotidien. L’expérience du citadin y est relativement complexe vu l’ampleur de l’espace urbain et des moyens de déplacement prévus pour y circuler. Dans ce système qui n’a fait que se complexifier, les piétons semblent avoir été oubliés. Pourtant, ils sont toujours présents, perdus dans les tumultes de la circulation. Des villes, comme Barcelone, ont su garder une place privilégiée pour le piéton. En effet, Barcelone a fait l’objet d’une démarche d’aménagement volontaire et robuste qui, dans les années 1990, s’est particulièrement intéressée à l’aménagement de l’espace public en faveur des piétons. Ainsi, il s’agira de repérer, dans les différents projets d’urbanisme, les orientations facilitant la marche voire la promenade. L’espace public barcelonais sera abordé comme exemple en matière d’aménagement favorisant les déplacements piétonniers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.001 |
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.
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".