Urbanité ludique et cultures sportives : analyse de quatre pratiques physiques de l’espace parisien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La reconquête de sites urbains et périurbains s’inscrit dans l’évolution des cultures sportives contemporaines. Elle est marquée, entre autres, par l’émergence de pratiques ludosportives alternatives (spéléologie urbaine, parkour, street golf, etc.) qui ne s’inscrivent pas sur les espaces aménagés. Ces pratiques physiques, véritables jeux novateurs, élargissent l’éventail des pratiques culturelles et mobilisent ce que nous appelons une urbanité ludique. La réappropriation des espaces urbains suppose une adaptation des techniques corporelles et sportives usuelles (course, gymnastique, etc.) aux lieux pratiqués : rues, parcs, jardins, places, souterrains, immeubles. Cette réappropriation contribue fortement à développer une légitimité ludique et à souder les participants au sein d’une même communauté pratiquante et auto-organisée. L’identification et le « droit à la ville » analysés ici permettent de distinguer deux logiques d’actions : des pratiques ludosportives urbaines s’inscrivant sur des lieux qui ne se « voient pas » – invisibles ; une seconde concernant les lieux qui se « donnent à voir » – visibles.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".