MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562136657 · doi:10.7202/1035054ar

Luttes urbaines : leurs acteurs et les chercheurs

2016· article· fr· W2562136657 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michel Wieviorka

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Community Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Même si les luttes urbaines se déploient en dehors de la production pour se situer dans le champ de la vie hors travail, de la consommation collective, de la reproduction, elles ont le plus souvent été vécues et traitées, au début des années 70, dans les catégories du mouvement ouvrier et de la lutte anticapitaliste. À travers l’histoire récente des luttes urbaines en France, que synthétise brièvement l’article, se dessine un nouvel axe de ces luttes qui ne se réfère plus à une problématique marxiste. Ceux qui manifestent à vélo contre l’automobile en ville, ceux qui mettent en cause des projets d’autoroute, des plans d’urbanisme, etc. ne le font guère en termes anticapitalistes. L’action tire son sens d’elle-même, elle n’est pas interprétée comme étant celle du mouvement ouvrier. Elle articule des revendications précises à une contestation générale de la croissance et de ses conséquences. Elle mêle ainsi la défense d’intérêts particuliers, une critique culturelle et une critique démocratique du mode de gestion étatique de l’urbain. Cet axe récent des luttes urbaines pose de nombreux problèmes à l’analyse. L’auteur esquisse à leur sujet une série d’hypothèses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Community DevelopmentSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207