MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018524226 · doi:10.3166/ges.15.267-284

De la ressource à la trajectoire : quelles stratégies de développement territorial ?

2013· article· fr· W2018524226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hugues François, Maud Hirczak, Nicolas Senil

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie Économie Société · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans la continuit de prcdents travaux, cet article s'intresse la notion de ressource territoriale en portant plus prcisment sur le rle de l'oprateur des ressources. Pour cela, il propose d'tudier les dynamiques territoriales l'aide d'une matrice des trajectoires de construction et de valorisation des ressources. Cette matrice constitue par la suite une grille de lecture indite de l'oprateur des ressources. Cette mthode, avant tout qualitative, permet d'identifier l'oprateur et d'analyser ses 1 Cet article s'inscrit dans la continuit de travaux mens sur la ressource territoriale depuis plusieurs annes. Il fait notamment suite un prcdent article publi dans la RERU Dans la continuit de cet article, les auteurs ont eu l'occasion d'organiser un atelier Ressource territoriale : objets et mthode lors du XLIII e colloque de l'ASRDLF Grenoble-Chambry durant lequel la question de l'oprateur avait t souleve et avait fait l'objet de nombreuses discussions (une version rvise de la communication prsente cette occasion a t publie sous la rfrence Dans la continuit de ces dbats, les auteurs ont prsent une communication lors du XLV e colloque de l'ASRDLF Rimouski. Le prsent article est directement issu de cette communication et des discussions au sein de l'atelier Les ressources naturelles et culturelles et leurs liens aux territoires et l'environnement .

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations35
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéographie Économie SociétéSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207