Domaines « vides » et structuration morphologique de l’agglomération montréalaise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'avenir de l'agglomération montréalaise inquiète. Plusieurs s'en préoccupent. Mais s'interroge-t-on suffisamment sur le fait que la recherche de solutions a rarement suscité une remise en question de la manière dont le problème est posé depuis près de deux décennies? Se pourrait-il, par exemple, que les nombreux domaines « vides » de l'agglomération ne soient pas tant les résidus d'un étalement incontrôlé que des formes structurantes? C'est l'hypothèse qui est proposée. L'identification d'une structure de positions, contraignante à l'égard de l'établissement, permet par ailleurs de poser le problème du zonage, instrument privilégié d'un urbanisme en crise. Loin d'en justifier le rejet, la présente étude en montrera au contraire la pertinence, pourvu qu'on tienne mieux compte de sa prétention originelle, qui était de protéger les propriétés existantes bien plus que d'attribuer des utilités aux positions non encore occupées.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".