MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885871893 · doi:10.4000/metropoles.5577

Le logement comme clé pour le droit à la ville des femmes

2018· article· fr· W2885871893 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Ève Desroches

Bibliographic record

VenueMétropoles · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiquePierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des féministes à travers le monde se mobilisent pour leur droit à la ville. Ces dernières luttent contre les dynamiques capitalistes et patriarcales qui induisent d’importants freins à leur participation sociopolitique et à leur appropriation des ressources et des opportunités urbaines. Parmi les diverses luttes et écrits qui traitent du droit à la ville, le logement constitue un important point de convergence. En effet, son accès apparaît comme une condition préalable à l’exercice de ce droit collectif. Cependant, la plupart des auteurs et mouvements sociaux qui ont recours à cette notion considèrent le capitalisme comme principale structure impliquée dans l’urbanisation ; c’est pourquoi le droit à la ville est généralement envisagé comme une lutte de classes. Notre étude de cas sur des mobilisations urbaines féministes pour le droit au logement démontre que le capitalisme et le patriarcat sont deux systèmes consubstantiels qui empêchent les femmes de s’approprier les logements de leur quartier et de participer à sa revitalisation. Pour prendre en considération l’influence du système patriarcal, la notion de droit à la ville doit être élargie ou du moins adaptée en intégrant plusieurs approches de la justice pour permettre des revendications et pratiques de luttes féministes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMétropolesSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207