Aménager la métropole nature: retour sur les efforts passés de planification dans la région de Montréal et essai d'évaluation de la situation actuelle des banlieues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EnglishThis article presents a critical view of the city planning phases that have patterned the Montreal metropolitan area from the 19th century up until today, by focusing on the social relations with the natural environment. Montreal has manufactured an image of itself akin to other great cities, which emphasizes natural landmarks and features, agricultural activities located on its outskirts and a physical proximity to nature. Efforts to plan the development of a metropolis embedded in nature have had a slight impact. Nevertheless, a large area of the land included in the metropolitan region remains today green but under constant pressure to be urbanised. In fact, close to 60% of the Montreal metropolitan area is made up of natural or agricultural domains. However, analysis of current data seems to indicate that the distribution of such areas throughout the area reflects social and economic differences. Well- off suburbs are greener and suffer less the loss of their wooded areas. francaisLe present article propose une interpretation des jalons de la planification urbaine et de l'amenagement du territoire dans la region metropolitaine de Montreal, depuis le XIXe s. et jusqu'a nos jours, sous l'angle des rapports sociaux a la nature. L'image de Montreal s'appuie, en effet, a l'instar d'autres grandes metropoles, sur la mise en scene de grands ensembles naturels, d'une frange agricole periurbaine et d'une nature de proximite. Les tentatives de planifier l'amenagement d'une metropole nature donnent toutefois des resultats mitiges. Il n'en reste pas moins qu'une grande proportion du territoire de la region metropolitaine, soit pres de 60 %, est toujours composee d'espaces verts, naturels ou agricoles, mais subit les effets d'une constante erosion. Par contre, le partage de la nature dans la metropole apparait, a la lumiere d'une analyse pour la periode recente, refleter les differentiations socio- economiques. Les banlieues a statut socio-economique eleve sont plus vertes et perdent moins de leurs surfaces boisees.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".