Coordonner la construction territoriale par une vision du futur. Les dynamiques d’investissement agricole dans l’InterScot toulousain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’urbanisation rapide questionne les conditions de préservation d’un secteur agricole viable dans les espaces périurbains. À travers le prisme des décisions d’investissement des agriculteurs, l’article interroge l’émergence d’une vision partagée du futur dans l’InterSCoT toulousain. Les auteurs analysent vingt entretiens avec des agriculteurs à la lumière du concept de futurité de J.R. Commons et en triangulant les résultats à l’aide d’un focus group avec des acteurs de la planification urbaine et de l’encadrement agricole. Les résultats soulignent un manque significatif de coordination entre ces acteurs. La remise en question de pratiques de l’encadrement ainsi que la construction d’une vision partagée du futur entre les acteurs du développement local apparaissent nécessaires pour une meilleure insertion des projets des agriculteurs dans le projet territorial toulousain.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".