Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sous l'impulsion des transformations subies par le mode de production dominant, le fordisme, la ville se trouve confrontée à de nouveaux défis ; restructuration industrielle, chômage structurel, pauvreté, criminalité, etc. Par ailleurs, ces mêmes transformations offrent des possibilités nouvelles à la ville en tant que lieu privilégié d'innovation et de croissance. La concurrence pour les investissements productifs devient une affaire de grandes villes à l'échelle internationale. Ce nouveau contexte exige une prise de conscience des nouveaux enjeux et une adaptation conséquente des styles de gestion. Après avoir identifié les tendances lourdes du mode de prodution et les limites du laisser-faire, l'article prône une gestion urbaine moins bureaucratique, plus conciliante et davantage axée sur l'entrepreneurship. La gestion de l'urbain doit s'orienter vers une stratégie active de développement et de promotion des avantages concurrentiels de l'agglomération. Elle doit s'appuyer dans cette démarche sur le leadership accru des élus et sur la volonté de faire converger les forces émanant de différents groupes et organisations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".