Montréal, « collectivité accueillante » pour les étudiants internationaux ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Montréal figure fréquemment dans le palmarès des meilleures villes étudiantes au monde et elle mise plus que jamais sur l’apport des étudiants internationaux à son dynamisme économique et culturel. En revisitant la notion de « collectivité accueillante » formulée par des chercheurs canadiens (Belkhodja, 2009 ; Esses et al., 2010), cet article présente les discours et les orientations de la ville étudiante tournée vers l’internationalisation, en les contrastant avec les expériences sur le terrain, qui elles, sont susceptibles de questionner les qualités d’accueil de la ville. Nous mettons en évidence à partir d’entrevues et d’observations comment la représentation idéalisée de la ville produit des défis sur les plans des conditions urbaines, de la responsabilité et de l’action collective, ainsi qu’au plan de la participation et de la visibilité.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".