Le développement économique communautaire et la cohésion sociale : le cas du cinéma Beaubien à Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé \nCe texte porte sur une étude de cas, celle du cinéma Beaubien à Montréal, qui permet d’illustrer le rôle joué par les CDEC (Corporations de développement économique communautaire) dans la cohésion sociale locale et dans le développement local intégré. Ce cas montre que le développement culturel peut contribuer au renouvellement et à la cohésion sociale des quartiers. Il reste des défis pour le cinéma comme pour les CDEC en matière de cohésion sociale, mais le succès de ce projet et ses effets positifs peuvent inspirer d’autres initiatives. \nAbstract \nThis paper presents the case of the Beaubien Cinema in Montreal, which illustrates the role played by Community Economic Development Corporations (CEDCs) in local social cohesion and integrated development. The case shows how cultural development can contribute to the reconversion and social cohesion of city districts. Some challenges still remain for the cinema as for the CEDCs in terms of social cohesion, but the success of the project and its positive impacts show the way for other initiatives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".