MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612981865 · doi:10.7202/1035059ar

Groupes en lutte à Paris

2016· article· fr· W2612981865 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maïté Matthieu, Elisabeth Forest, Pascale Tissier

Bibliographic record

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

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trois actions de mobilisation sont relatées ici. La Confédération syndicale du cadre de vie intervient dans le 13e arrondissement pour contester avec les habitants les modalités d’établissement des impôts locaux pour les locataires; elle aide en outre un groupe de militants qui tentent d’obtenir la création d’un parc de jeux pour enfants dans le quartier. 14eL’association Vivre dans le 14e arrondissement regroupe des comités d’immeubles et des mouvements de défense du quartier. Elle a combattu avec succès la construction d’une autoroute dans le quartier, obtenu la limitation de la construction de tours d’habitation, essaie de contrôler que le réhabilitation des immeubles soit faite en fonction des intérêts de la population du quartier. L’Atelier populaire d’architecture et d’urbanisme du Marais (APAUM) regroupe des architectes qui travaillent avec les habitants pour s’opposer aux projets de rénovation de certains îlots du quartier par des promoteurs privés, mais aussi par la société publique de H.L.M. Toutes les interventions sont élaborées en étroite association avec les habitants.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.004

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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