La restructuration de l’habitat au Burkina-Faso : un moyen pour la révolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Un des moyens d’implanter la révolution au Burkina-Faso (ancienne Haute-Volta) a consisté à restructurer les secteurs d’habitat spontané de la capitale, Ouagadougou, où loge 60 % de la population. Pour résoudre les problèmes d’habitat des couches populaires, le régime burkinabé a misé sur une approche collective au logement, visant à faire émerger une conscience collective de l’habitat. Mais des blocages ont empêché sa stratégie de se réaliser : blocages au point de vue de l’interprétation des objectifs par les résidants, blocages liés à l’ampleur des ressources humaines, techniques et logistiques nécessaires à l’entreprise, mauvaise allocation des ressources, gaspillage. Plus fondamentalement, c’est le projet collectif d’habitat, l’émergence d’une conscience collective de l’habitat, qui risque de ne pouvoir se réaliser : qu’adviendra-t-il de la révolution burkinabé si elle devait échouer sur une composante aussi critique de sa stratégie ?
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".