Le logement communautaire au Québec : apports et limites d’une innovation sociale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le logement communautaire constitue au Québec une alternative au logement privé à but lucratif et au logement public subventionné de type HLM. Il s’agit d’un logement de propriété collective incarnée soit par une coopérative d’habitation, soit par un organisme sans but lucratif (OSBL) d’habitation. Ces deux formules juridiques, la coopérative et l’association, en plus d’offrir des logements accessibles financièrement, contribuent à la prise en charge de leur milieu de vie par les résidants en favorisant la participation, directe ou indirecte, de ces derniers à la gestion de leur ensemble résidentiel. La réalisation de ce type de logement implique l’engagement d’acteurs de la société civile, l’apport de fonds publics et une remise en cause de la logique marchande. Le logement communautaire représente ainsi une innovation sociale sur le plan des rapports de consommation, de production et de gouvernance. Nous mettons en lumière, dans cet article, non seulement les apports, mais aussi les limites de cette triple innovation sociale qui s’inscrit dans un mode de régulation associatif du logement.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".