Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet essai se propose d’envisager ce que pourraient être, dans leur diversité mais aussi leur cohérence, les traits, les problématiques et les perspectives d’une science géographique fondée sur le concept d’habiter. Distinguant trois instances d’analyse, l’espace habité, l’habitant et la cohabitation, l’idée est aussi d’envisager leur articulation dans les dynamiques d’un rapport d’habitation. Ainsi s’ouvrent les dimensions existentielles et politiques d’une telle approche. Au-delà, se pose l’éventualité d’une structuration topique fondamentale des êtres humains et des sociétés, c’est-à-dire celle d’espaces habités non géographiques, mais pourtant construits et appréhendables avec les notions communes aux espaces habités géographiques. Et cela revient encore à examiner les limites du concept autant que celles de cette science géographique.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.140 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".