MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210325307 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.32974

Mise à l’épreuve d’un projet de reconversion d’un territoire après la fermeture d’une centrale nucléaire : une illustration avec Fessenheim (France)

2021· article· fr· W4210325307 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Valentine Erné-Heintz, Valentine Bour

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La fermeture d’une centrale nucléaire remet en question le modèle économique sur lequel le territoire d’accueil s’est développé. Cet article prend appui sur un cas pratique, la fermeture de la centrale nucléaire de Fessenheim (France) et plus particulièrement le projet de reconversion du territoire. Ce travail s’inscrit dans la continuité d’autres travaux autour de la nucléarité. L’analyse se structure en deux parties : dans la première, nous verrons que les échelles mises en place poursuivent un processus d’objectivation des enjeux et varient en fonction des périmètres d’action. Dans la seconde partie, nous insisterons sur la difficulté à transformer un territoire qui a connu son développement autour d’une mono-industrie nucléaire. L’ambition affichée dans le projet de reconversion exprime une volonté d’aller plus loin en devenant un territoire exemplaire dans la transition énergétique. Nous montrerons que cette déconstruction du passé nucléaire ne va pas de soi et pose certains problèmes sur le terrain. Sur le plan méthodologique, nous nous basons sur des entretiens qualitatifs réalisés auprès d’élus rencontrés au printemps 2021.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207