Acteurs urbains en conflit, Québec, 1965-2000 : essai d’analyse statistique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’aménagement des villes suscite de plus en plus de débats et de conflits qui mettent en scène des acteurs publics, des acteurs privés et d’autres issus de la “société civile”. Comment les rapports d’association et d’opposition entre ces trois catégories d’acteurs ont-ils évolué au cours des quatre dernières décennies ? Un essai de modélisation statistique de ces rapports, à l’aide de données portant sur plus de 2 000 conflits ayant pris place à Québec entre 1965 et 2000, produit une série de résultats dont certains confortent la thèse de la démocratisation des processus de régulation urbaine, pendant que d’autres nourrissent celle d’une certaine instrumentalisation de la participation, et que d’autres encore esquissent une géographie des coalitions et des oppositions entre acteurs urbains.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".