Géomorphologie : géographie globale – géographie totale – associations internationales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The great advances that geomorphology has made in recent years make necessary a critical re-examination of the relationships between this science and the field of geography. Is geomorphology truly geographical ? And if not, how can it become so ? Geomorphology has its roots in geology and was, of course, not designed to meet the specific needs of geographers. Under the leadership of W. M. Davis, geographers eventually adopted the study of geomorphology but did Utile to adapt it to particular purposes of their discipline. Most geographers can never aspire to true excellence in geomorphology because of their generally inadequate training in the physical sciences. We have found that most geographers tend to fall into one of four groups : 1. Those who consider themselves to be geomorphologists (about one-fourth of all geographers) ; 2. Those who just try to be informed in geomorphology ; 3. Those who ignore the existence of geomorphology ; 4. The « complete » geographer who practices a « functional » geomorphology. It also appears that the majority of geographers do not consider land-man relations to be their principal field of interest. The definition that we as geographers give to geography tends to sanction the kind of geography that we are capable of doing. For example, the classical géographie globale, which is characterized by an explanatory description of a complex of physical and human eclectic elements, does not normally require either a « complete » or a genetic geomorphology ; also, complex techniques of geomorphological investigation are not essential. Of greater importance is a geomorphology'-which is functional to geography and which will help us to understand better man's distribution and activities on the surface of the earth. This partial or « functional » geomorphology has achieved its greatest development in France (as an integral part of géographie globale) and is practised by a large number of geographers. Géographie totale, an expression which refers more to the subject matter of this geography than to its methodology, is an ensemble of specialized yet inter-related disciplines (one of which is geomorphology). This pluralistic geography daims many more adherents than does géographie globale. Géographie totale allows us to study all aspects of what is now called geomorphology (but which may eventually be termed « cosmomorphology »). This new geomorphology is based on geophysical laws and is strictly quantitative. It is an integral part of the physical sciences but this does not mean that it is automatically divorced from man. Scientists of both the United States and the U. S. S. R. are actively engaged in this new geomorphology. We believe that it would be mutually advantageous for both the « functional » and the « complete » geomorphologists to group themselves into a new international association. To achieve this end we urge that the structures of the international Geographical Union be modified or that an « International Association of Geomorphology » be founded.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.013 |
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".