Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article combines the results of two doctoral research papers and is the fruit of work carried out within the framework of a more global study on the elite in the city. Two sociologists relate the plans for the extension of the city by the road inspectorate in the 19th century and the creation of the underground by the Service Spécial d’Etudes of the STIB in the 20th century. Behind the scenes in the state departments, by dissecting the internal archives of the administration (correspondence, reports, notes and circulars), we discover that civil servants and, more specifically, the technical bodies have developed a practice of time allowing the step-by-step realisation of large-scale projects. Time is a tactical and flexible element in these cases, formulated and manipulated in order to prompt an expansion of the city and to ensure the irreversible commitment of the stakeholders involved. The conclusion shared by the two analyses carried out in parallel questions the idea that it is necessary to have powerful visions and authority for Brussels in order to face major urbanistic challenges. As an alternative, based on information from the history of organisations, the authors propose to examine the technical bodies and their knowledge and capacity to act as mediators.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it