Cuisines collectives : modèle alternatif d’organisation sociale et économique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De plus en plus récupérée dans le contexte de la sécurité alimentaire, la cuisine collective se débat contre de vives poussées vers la marginalisation, la stigmatisation et l'exclusion. Cet article présente le portrait de cuisines collectives de la Basse-ville d'Ottawa qui s'inscrivent en rupture de la vision souvent trop réductionniste de la cuisine collective. Les artisanes et les artisans de cet aménagement collectif le conçoivent comme une étape acheminant à l'autonomie plutôt que comme une fin en soi avec pour objectifs ultimes de satisfaire des besoins nutritifs et d'assurer le développement de bonnes habitudes alimentaires. Animée d'un concept central, soit le statut d'actrice et d'acteur, la cuisine collective se positionne parmi les sources d'influence qui tentent de définir sa nature pour privilégier une définition socialisée, où la reprise du pouvoir est l'objectif ultime.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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.
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".