Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le miracle pétrolier tourne au mirage. Il ne s’agit déjà plus de ferrailler sur l’à-propos de consommer un carburant fossile importé ou d’extraction locale, mais bien de dénoncer l’intenable ronde d’investissements massifs consentis à des projets d’extraction alimentant des usages que des filières, des technologies et des infrastructures viables, mieux qualifiées et plus structurantes peuvent satisfaire à moindre coût social. Un cadre de comparaison technico-économique rigoureux entre les diverses filières de production d’énergie constitue la condition première d’une transition énergétique responsable sur le plan de l’éthique intergénérationnelle. À partir d’exemples témoignant du dynamisme de l’évolution technologique dans les réseaux énergétiques, on examinera les tenants et les aboutissants du cadre d’examen public des filières énergétiques qui doit présider, d’un point de vue intergénérationnel, à un consentement sociétal cohérent à l’égard des investissements publics ou privés dans le secteur de l’énergie.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".