MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1604001718 · doi:10.4000/norois.311

La question environnementale en géographie au Brésil : une approche épistémologique

2005· article· fr· W1604001718 on OpenAlexaff
Francisco Mendonça

Bibliographic record

VenueNorois · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Development and Societal Issues
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’environnement est un des éléments constituant de la science géographique moderne. Il met en évidence la richesse dualiste de la connaissance géographique. La conception de l’environnement, toutefois, a beaucoup changé au cours du siècle dernier car elle a subi différentes influences. Dès le milieu du xxe siècle la géographie, les autres sciences et même la société en général, concevaient l’environnement exclusivement à partir d’une perspective naturaliste. Dans les quarante dernières années la notion de l’environnement a intégré, progressivement, la dimension sociale, car la crise contemporaine de l’environnement ne peut pas être conçue et résolue non plus par les approches traitant séparément la nature et la société. Dans ce contexte, la problématique environnementale actuelle demande à la géographie de revoir ses conceptions en tenant compte des nouvelles propositions théoriques et méthodologiques des sciences de l’environnement. La prise en compte de la société et de la nature dans les études liées à la problématique environnementale, dans laquelle nature et société sont conçues comme éléments du processus, donne naissance à un nouveau courant de la connaissance géographique nommée dans ce texte de géographie socio-environnementale.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.039
Scholarly communication0.0150.021
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNoroisSame topicUrban Development and Societal IssuesFrench-language works237,207