MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093623887 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.11754

La schizophrénie écologique : le cas des déplacements quotidiens à Lyon

2012· article· fr· W2093623887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stéphane La Branche

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article explore l’enjeu du décalage entre information, valeurs et actes réalisés par des individus dans un contexte de lutte contre les changements climatiques. Ce décalage n’est pas anodin, car il peut représenter un frein majeur aux efforts de réduction d’émissions et, au niveau théorique, il soulève la question de la solubilité du développement durable et participatif (DDP) dans la gouvernance climatique. Nous explorons cette problématique par le biais de la notion de schizophrénie écologique, appliquée à la question de la mobilité urbaine quotidienne, afin de mieux comprendre les raisons du refus, des réticences et des blocages aux mesures climato-énergétiques. Par le biais de 30 entretiens semi-directifs et d’un sondage réalisé auprès de 650 Lyonnais, nous avons relevé des grandes tendances liées aux réticences des gens à utiliser les transports en commun (TC) et à leur ’attachement’ à la voiture ; leurs motivations et leurs raisons de leur rejet relatif des modes doux de transports – TC, marche et vélo. Nous insistons dans ces pages sur les tensions entre les valeurs environnementales de ces individus et leurs comportements réels, qui nous ramènent à la notion de schizophrénie écologique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207