Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accueillant historiquement des populations fragiles socialement, les quartiers de la Goutte d’Or, à Paris, et du Raval, à Barcelone, ont été longtemps stigmatisés. Dans le but affiché de renverser cette situation, les administrations ont programmé, depuis les années 1980, des transformations importantes. Plus visibles dans l’urbanisme et le logement, ces actions ont atteint aussi d’autres domaines. Elles ont facilité un processus de gentrification et ont été la base d’une revalorisation de l’image de ces quartiers. La diversité culturelle et religieuse a été insérée dans ce processus, convertie en objet de promotion institutionnelle. Bien que les manifestations de cette pluralité soient à l’origine de conflits inscrits dans les rapports sociaux d’altérité, une idée légitime et consensuelle de diversité est mobilisée dans le cadre du processus de revalorisation. Cet article analyse ces discours et ces politiques concernant le cas particulier de l’islam, à partir des données issues d’une enquête de terrain menée dans les deux quartiers, entre 2016 et 2018.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".