Repenser l’informalité : la politique, les crises et la ville1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si l’informalité a été traditionnellement comprise comme un type de formation territoriale ou de catégorie de travail, cet article propose une conceptualisation alternative concevant l’informalité et la formalité en tant que formes de pratiques. L’article examine comment différentes relations de pratiques informelles et formelles rendent possible la planification, le développement et la politique urbains. Il explore également le rapport changeant entre l’informalité et la formalité dans la durée. Pour illustrer le potentiel politique d’une conceptualisation de l’informalité et de la formalité comme pratiques, l’article souligne les répercussions d’une crise urbaine particulière : les inondations liées à la mousson, en 2005, à Mumbai. La dernière partie de l’article propose enfin trois cadres conceptuels pour identifier les relations changeantes des pratiques informelles et formelles : la spéculation, la composition et le bricolage.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".