Les jardins zoologiques et la ville : Quelle nature pour le Biodôme de Montréal ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Biodôme de Montréal est un modèle des nouveaux types de jardins zoologiques qui ont émergé à partir des années 1980 et qui transcrivent un rapport renouvelé des sociétés occidentales, très largement urbanisées, à la nature. À travers l’analyse de cette institution ce sont les rapports entre l’homme et l’animal et plus largement la définition de la nature qui sont questionnés, laissant transparaître, au premier abord, un affaiblissement de l’opposition trop nette entre les catégories de nature et de culture. Cependant, plus profondément, il apparaît que les citadins cherchent surtout à se confronter à une nature exotique et sauvage, tout en restant loin des dangers et de la fatigue qu’impose un vrai voyage. C’est donc une nature édulcorée qui est mise en scène et dont l’altérité même reste étroitement confinée dans un espace précis afin de maintenir valide la distinction entre l’homme et la nature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".