MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245072429 · doi:10.7202/021362ar

Des paysages, des idées et des hommes : le projet collective de Charlevoix

2005· article· fr· W4245072429 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luc Bureau

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de géographie du Québec · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

D'une façon quelque peu empirique, on peut distinguer quatre phases intereliées dans le processus de formation de l'image collective d'un milieu : l'identification, la modélisation, la signification et l'affectivité. Partant de ces composantes fondamentales de l'activité perceptuelle, et les mettant elles-mêmes en relation avec celles du paysage (les formes, les habitants et les valeurs), il nous a été possible de reconstituer la trame du projet collectif de Charlevoix et d'en reconnaître le niveau de consistance dans le temps et dans l'espace. Essentiellement polydimensionnel et ouvert dans le passé lointain, ce « projet » semble se contracter au fur et à mesure que l'on progresse dans le temps : l'éventail de choix se referme, en imposant des comportements de plus en plus stéréotypés. Débordant le cadre du passé et du présent, on en arrive à anticiper le profil du « nouveau projet collectif » qui s'articule, non pas en prévision d'un retour à la polyvalence ancienne, mais en fonction d'une nouvelle conception du développement, cherchant à introduire les idées de planification, de participation collective et de protection du milieu.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de géographie du QuébecSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207