Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comme instrument d'administration publique, l'impôt foncier a profondément marqué de nombreuses régions, particulièrement en Amérique du Nord. La présente étude délimite les champs d'intérêt pertinents à une étude géographique de l'impôt foncier. On y trouvera en outre un survol des études que des géographes et d'autres spécialistes des sciences sociales ont consacrées aux effets économiques, à l'incidence sociale et à l'efficacité administrative de cette forme d'impôt. Or, ces études n'ont pas de perspective historique. À ce titre, la bibliographie consacrée à cette question gagnerait à inclure des analyses fondées sur une perspective historique et matérialiste. De telles analyses jetteraient un éclairage nouveau sur l'évolution historique du système fiscal et permettraient de mieux comprendre les forces de classe agissant sur cette évolution. L'étude géographique de l'application de l'impôt foncier dans telle ou telle région pourrait ainsi s'inscrire dans un cadre plus global.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".