Participation populaire et gestion de l’habitat en Amérique latine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d’exemples de participation populaire à la gestion de l’habitat, tant rural qu’urbain, au Mexique surtout, l’article démontre que les programmes pour l’amélioration de l’habitat ne doivent pas être de simples expédients politiques destinés à tranquilliser les populations, mais plutôt le résultat d’efforts visant à améliorer l’ensemble des conditions de vie. La participation populaire ne peut pas être qu’une intervention plus ou moins volontaire de la population dans l’exécution de tâches programmées mais bien un processus actif d’intervention dans la structure du pouvoir. Les projets de développement de la vallée de Chamal (Tamaulipas, Mexique), des architectes aux pieds nus sont pour l’auteur des exemples positifs de participation populaire sur lesquels elle base se réflexion.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".