Vers des visions partagées
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article porte sur la conception d’outils culturellement adaptés d’aide à la décision en aménagement et en architecture développés avec la communauté innue de Uashat et Maliotenam, au Nitassinan. Il illustre la pertinence de la recherche-création, fondée sur l’inclusion des savoirs et expériences autochtones, pour élaborer des outils pragmatiques. Ces outils prennent la forme de guides : le premier, pour la rénovation et l’adaptation de maisons, et le deuxième, pour l’aménagement et la requalification de milieux urbanisés. Ils visent à soutenir les communautés autochtones et leurs professionnels de l’aménagement dans trois aspects : enjeux de planification, liens entre formes bâties et aspirations communautaires, et construction de visions collectives pour la transformation durable des milieux de vie. Ces intentions mettent en jeu des méthodes participatives et des processus de consultation qui montrent qu’une telle élaboration d’outils d’aide à la décision permet le renforcement du sentiment de communauté et l’empowerment des utilisateurs.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".