La communication entre architecte, exécutant et propriétaire: Une étude du langage dans les projets de construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
de construction Bennefissa Nabila 1 .Résumé Cet article explore la communication entre l'architecte, l'exe cutant et le proprie taire dans le cadre des projets de construction.Il analyse la manie re dont ces trois acteurs utilisent le langage pour ne gocier des concepts techniques, des de lais, des cou ts et des attentes, tout en tenant compte de leurs ro les respectifs et de leurs connaissances spe cialise es.La question principale est de comprendre comment la barrie re linguistique entre ces groupes peut affecter la re ussite d'un projet, tant sur le plan technique que sur le plan de la relation contractuelle et sociale.L'e tude propose des hypothe ses sur l'impact de la spe cialisation du langage professionnel, des divergences dans les attentes des parties prenantes et des malentendus lie s a l'interpre tation des termes de la construction.
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 | 0.016 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".