Un accord pour la biodiversité marine : le cas du parc naturel marin de l’estuaire de la Gironde et de la mer des Pertuis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La conservation marine est devenue un enjeu mondial. Les aires marines protégées sont maintenant un instrument au cœur des débats. Dans cette étude, est analysé le dialogue qui prit place durant la création du parc naturel marin de l’estuaire de la Gironde et de la mer des Pertuis dans le sud-ouest de la France en avril 2015. Cette étude analyse les différentes étapes de la concertation réalisée en amont de la création du parc marin et observe l’appropriation des enjeux (notamment environnementaux) par les participants. Cette étude montre que cette concertation permet l’appropriation des enjeux environnementaux grâce à la co-construction de connaissances socio-économiques et environnementales notamment autour de la question des ressources halieutiques. L’analyse des entretiens auprès des participants permet d’identifier également comment les différentes tensions advenues pendant le processus ont contribué à préparer la décision.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".