Bibliographic record
Abstract
A partir de la fin des années 1960, l’archéologue Raymond Lemaire, professeur à l’université catholique de Louvain en Belgique, contribue à la remise en question des méthodes de rénovation urbaine adoptées par les Services techniques de la Ville de Bruxelles pour les quartiers les plus anciens du centre historique. A travers son rôle d’expert pour l’association « Quartier des Arts », il se voit confier plusieurs études en vue de l’adoption de « plans particuliers d’aménagement » pour des îlots de grand intérêt patrimonial, ce qui lui permet de mettre à l’épreuve de la réalité les principes théoriques qu’il contribue à élaborer, au même moment, au sein d’organisations internationales telles qu’ICOMOS ou le Conseil de l’Europe. Notre contribution vise, à travers l’exemple significatif de la rénovation de l’ « îlot Sainte-Anne », à éclairer ce moment-clé de l’histoire récente de l’urbanisme bruxellois et à jeter un regard critique et nuancé sur le travail de Raymond Lemaire.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".