Rapport au quartier, représentation de l'espace et mobilité quotidienne: le cas d'un quartier périphérique de Québec-ville
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette etude porte sur l'articulation des niveaux sociaux, cognitifs et affectifs du rapport a l'espace urbain afin de saisir le contexte dans lequel s'inscrivent les comportements spatiaux. Les representations sociales du quartier de residence, ses representations spatiales ainsi que celles de l'agglomeration urbaine, et enfin l'echelle et la nature de l'attachement au lieu ont permis de degager deux figures du rapport a l'espace : l'une qualifiee de rapport centripete, l'autre de rapport centrifuge depuis le quartier de residence. Ainsi, les resultats obtenus introduisent le rapport a l'espace comme un processus qui participe a la construction d'un style de vie sur lequel s'etaye la mobilite quotidienne. Ce regard dynamique de la relation individu / espace urbain permet de montrer que la mobilite quotidienne ne s'exprime pas uniquement selon un continuum ou le citadin est plus ou moins mobile, mais qu'elle depend et se structure selon les motifs qui generent les deplacements urbains. On constate effectivement qu'une mobilite centree sur la consommation se differentie de celle orientee vers la sociabilite et le rapport a l'espace urbain du citadin.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| 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".