Contrat d’axe et Transit-Oriented Development : quel renouvellement de l’action publique en matière de mobilité et d’aménagement ? (Point de vue d’acteurs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le contrat d’axe, apparu en France en 2002, et le Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), né aux États-Unis en 1993, constituent deux outils visant à coordonner urbanisme et transports collectifs. Cet article propose une mise en perspective de ces démarches. Il aborde les formes de partenariat institutionnel sur lesquelles elles reposent, et la manière dont elles se positionnent par rapport aux dynamiques persistantes d’édification de la ville de l’automobile. Si ces deux instruments apparaissent au service d’une même ambition, produire une ville dense aux abords des stations de transport collectif, les moyens d’action mobilisés et la nature des acteurs impliqués constituent des différences fondamentales.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".