Achat public et développement durable entre compatibilités et frictions de paradigmes et de pratiques : le cas de l’industrie du transport ferroviaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se propose d’analyser, selon deux niveaux de lecture, le degré de compatibilité entre les enjeux développement durable et l’utilisation des achats publics au sein des marchés de l’Union Européenne. Le premier niveau est d’ordre conceptuel, avec un questionnement de la concordance possible entre les principes théoriques, au coeur du développement durable, d’un côté et de l’idéologie européenne, sous-jacente au fonctionnement des achats publics, de l’autre. Le second niveau est d’ordre pragmatique, en interrogeant le degré d’intégration possible du développement durable dans les marchés publics. Nous appuierons nos réflexions sur le cas de l’industrie ferroviaire, à l’aide des matériaux issus d’une recherche-intervention menée au sein d’une entreprise industrielle dans ce secteur.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".