Cinquante ans de développement de la fonction résidentielle dans le Vieux-Montréal et les anciens faubourgs : quelles leçons en tirer ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis les années 1960, des interventions ont eu lieu dans le Vieux‑Montréal et les anciens faubourgs promouvant des stratégies de conservation patrimoniale et de développement touristique. Or, une troisième stratégie — le développement de la fonction résidentielle — a façonné le tissu social et urbain d’un Vieux‑Montréal habité. Une analyse des exercices de planification montre que la fonction résidentielle n’a pas fait l’objet d’une vision d’ensemble, privilégiant des aménagements à la pièce au gré des opportunités. Plus de 50 ans plus tard, cette situation mène à la reproduction de manques et de nuisances de cohabitation qui remettent en question le rôle de la fonction résidentielle dans le développement d’une nouvelle identité urbaine des quartiers historiques.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".