Du passé, faisons table rase ? La controverse patrimoniale comme révélateur de luttes d’appropriation de l’espace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article analyse une controverse autour de la conservation de tours d’extraction désaffectées dans un ancien bassin minier français. Les mobilisations et tout autant les non-mobilisations autour de cet enjeu sont révélatrices d’une variété de positions à l’égard de l’appropriation tant matérielle que symbolique de l’espace urbain. L’analyse des logiques de distribution des attitudes (hostiles, favorables ou indifférentes) montre une configuration d’acteurs et de groupes divers (administration culturelle, élus, association mémorielle, syndicats, habitants) dont les rapports à l’enjeu et les raisons d’agir sont spécifiques et se révèlent peu compatibles. La conservation de traces du passé industriel, sous la forme particulière de la mise en patrimoine, relève donc d’une forme de volontarisme dont il est intéressant d’observer les conditions de félicité dans un espace territorial donné. L’échec final de l’entreprise de conservation met en lumière la faible autonomie institutionnelle, politique et sociale du répertoire culturel d’aménagement de l’espace.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".