Mixité sociale ou inclusion sociale ? Bricolages montréalais pour un jeu à acteurs multiples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé L’histoire de la mixité sociale comme catégorie d’action publique dans les politiques de logement à Montréal (province du Québec, Canada) peut être lue à travers des projets exemplaires et des moments-phares, qui l’incarnent à des échelles spatiales différentes. À chaque fois cependant, la mixité sociale apparaît plus comme le résultat d’un bricolage où interviennent plusieurs acteurs autour de l’enjeu du logement social que comme une politique top down. Elle est aussi davantage associée aux statuts d’occupation (propriété, location) qu’à des préoccupations de cohésion sociale. Les hlm , les coopératives et le logement abordable y jouent un rôle-clé. Enfin, elle se déploie aujourd’hui sur le registre de l’équité socio-spatiale et repose fortement sur le dynamisme et l’influence des organismes communautaires.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.000 |
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".