Griffintown : l'enjeu de la participation citoyenne dans les projets de développement urbain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Griffintown, ancien quartier ouvrier de Montréal, est aujourd'jui amené à devenir le centre de gravité de l'expansion future de la ville. Des programmes de rénovation urbaine sont amorcés par l'administration publique. Des investisseurs privés proposent d'immenses projets de développement immobilier. Les résidents du secteur qui font la promotion d'un développement local, humaniste et patrimonial voient leurs perspectives d'avenir mis à mal par ce type de développement. Griffintown fait aujourd'hui débat dans les instances publiques montréalaises. Ce mémoire pose la question de la place accordée aux citoyens dans l'élaboration de projet urbain. La ville appartient-elle à tous ? Les consultations publiques constituent-elles des opportunités réelles offertes aux citoyens pour agir sur les enjeux locaux ? Ne sont-elles pas à l'inverse des instruments de mobilisation de la population ?
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".