Manières de voir, manières de faire : moderniser les canaux gravitaires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le sud de la France, les canaux d’irrigation gravitaire témoignent d’une maîtrise séculaire de l’eau par les sociétés locales. Mais aujourd’hui, le devenir de ces aménagements (appelés « béals » en Cévennes gardoises) ne va plus de soi. Leur présence dérange, s’articulant difficilement aux nouvelles injonctions de partage et de qualité pour la gestion de l’eau (lois sur l’eau 1992, 2006). Pour résoudre des situations devenues problématiques, un processus de modernisation - institutionnel et technique - des canaux a été initié par l’Administration. À partir d’un travail de terrain en Cévennes auprès des sociétés d’irrigants composant avec la modernisation de leurs béals, cet article étudie les réactions et interrogations des habitants face à une conception administrative des canaux afin d’interroger la rencontre entre des modes de relation des acteurs à l’eau.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".