Approche des relations des visiteurs à l’espace : une expérience du paysage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente le cadre théorique et méthodologique de notre recherche doctorale sur l’expérience de l’espace de marcheurs en montagne. Cette recherche repose sur un double postulat qui pose le paysage et l’expérience touristique comme deux entrées privilégiées pour comprendre les relations de l’être humain à l’espace. De notre exploration bibliographique sur l’expérience touristique, nous retenons deux concepts qui nous semblent particulièrement éclairants pour traiter la question de la relation des touristes à l’espace : la conscience géographique et la spirale. En mobilisant et en définissant ces deux concepts, ainsi que celui de paysage, d’une part, nous interrogeons les particularités de l’expérience paysagère des marcheurs. D’autre part, nous proposons une méthode de recherche qualitative et phénoménologique pour recueillir des récits d’expériences touristiques et comprendre quelles sont, au travers de ces expériences, les significations attribuées au(x) paysage(s).
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".