Gouvernance métropolitaine et régimes politiques de frontière
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article analyse les relations entre divers paliers de gouvernement dans le contexte de l’agglomeration transfrontaliere d’Ottawa-Gatineau. Cette region metropolitaine est atypique par rapport aux espaces urbains transfrontaliers qui sont habituellement documentes dans la litterature. Notre analyse cherche a determiner comment les caracteristiques particulieres d’Ottawa-Gatineau (une frontiere interprovinciale et un statut de capitale federale) se traduisent au niveau des rapports entre les divers paliers de gouvernement. Nous faisons appel a la grille d’analyse developpee par Leresche et Saez (1997) qui distingue trois regimes politiques de frontiere – le gouvernement (limes), la gouvernabilite (marche) et la gouvernance (synapse). En reprenant ces trois categories, nous montrons comment la construction d’un espace metropolitain transfrontalier a Ottawa-Gatineau est marquee par une trajectoire multiscalaire au cours de laquelle se succedent le regime de gouvernement (pour la periode 1950-2000) et celui de gouvernabilite (depuis 2000). Bien qu’on puisse observer des signes precurseurs d’un regime de gouvernance metropolitaine transfrontaliere, plusieurs elements tendent a montrer que le regime de gouvernabilite perdure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".