Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Le phénomène de colocation connaît un développement important au Québec depuis plusieurs années. Une enquête de terrain, menée en 1999 et 2000 auprès de colocataires d’un quartier populaire de la ville de Québec, ouvre à la compréhension de cette nouvelle façon d’habiter, d’organiser le quotidien et de négocier le rapport à l’autre. La constitution d’un regroupement éphémère, sans intimité relationnelle, donne lieu à un jeu permanent de rapprochement et de mise à distance dans la construction d’un chez-soi. L’auteure explore la manière de vivre « ensemble » et « séparément » à la fois, selon d’étranges configurations, parfois composées seulement d’hommes ou de femmes, parfois mixtes. Cette ethnographie porte sur des points très concrets : négociation de l’espace, façon d’envisager le chez-soi, partage des produits domestiques aussi bien que des activités quotidiennes et des tâches ménagères.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".