MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262464827 · doi:10.4000/ethiquepublique.1984

Les promesses ambiguës de la démocratie participative

2005· article· fr· W2262464827 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Laurence Bhérer

Bibliographic record

VenueÉthique Publique · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’émergence de nouvelles légitimités politiques ouvre la voie à la transformation de la démocratie, qui se caractérise par l’intégration de la démocratie participative à la démocratie représentative. Le premier apport de la démocratie participative tient à la possibilité de rapprocher les gouvernants et les gouvernés en reconnaissant le savoir profane comme un ensemble cognitif recevable en matière de décision publique. À partir de l’exemple des conseils de quartier de Québec, cet article démontre que si ce rapprochement est bien réel, il se fait selon des logiques semblables à celles de la démocratie représentative. La formation d’une élite citoyenne se rapproche en fait des rapports traditionnels entre électeurs et élus. Le principe de distinction de la représentation politique s’applique également dans le cadre de la démocratie participative. La démocratie représentative apparaît comme l’horizon indépassable de la concrétisation de l’idéal démocratique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉthique PubliqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207