MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1859332124 · doi:10.7202/001406ar

Les fondements économiques de la question urbaine

2002· article· fr· W1859332124 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Fernand LAMARCHE

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologie et sociétés · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question du logement qui condense une bonne partie des problèmes sociaux en milieu urbain, ne peut se poser séparément de l'analyse de la production capitaliste, et surtout de celle du capitalisme immobilier. Dans un premier temps, on cherche à comprendre comment la production marchande et capitaliste entraîne la formation des grandes villes modernes. Outre: la socialisation du procès de production dans la grande industrie, un des facteurs déterminants de l'explosion urbaine apparaît dans la tendance à la concentration géographique des capitaux privés. Cette tendance n'est compréhensible qu'en référence aux lois de la circulation du capital, qui font l'objet d'une deuxième partie. Ces lois déterminent la division du capital social en différents capitaux à fonctions spécialisées. On voit dans un troisième tempii que parmi ces capitaux spécialisés, on peut compter le capital immobilier dont la fonction particulière porte sur l'organisation spatiale des activités liées à la reproduction de l'ensemble du capital. Enfin, on considère les effets que provoque le capitalisme immobilier sur le marché des terrains et la question du logement. La situation de la ville de Québec est traités à titre d'exemple.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.378
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.145 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociologie et sociétés→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→