La gentrification au Québec : les gens, les lieux, les pratiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le phénomène tour à tour qualifié de gentrification ou d’embourgeoisement, par lequel l’habitat populaire est investi par de nouvelles populations mieux nanties en capital culturel ou économique, s’est imposé au coeur des luttes urbaines et de l’action communautaire comme l’un des principaux enjeux contemporains de justice sociale. Dans ce texte, nous proposons d’abord quelques fragments d’une généalogie québécoise du concept de gentrification (ou d’embourgeoisement) et du phénomène qu’il recouvre, à partir d’éléments qui ne visent pas à clore mais bien à alimenter le débat scientifique sur des bases théoriques explicites et transparentes. Peut-on parler d’une ou de gentrifications québécoises et, si oui, quels sont les éléments constitutifs de cette singularité? Cette question est l’occasion d’esquisser un bilan de plusieurs décennies de débats et de recherches, en faisant ressortir certaines particularités du contexte québécois, et en identifiant un certain nombre d’angles morts, autour de trois axes : les gens; les lieux; les pratiques.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".