MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414633049

Metropolitan railway system as a tool of french metropolis affirmation ? : French issues and international insights

2025· article· fr· W4414633049 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Valentin Tristan Buteau-Deimon

Bibliographic record

Venuetheses.fr (ABES) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCross-Border Cooperation and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaContext (archaeology)Scope (computer science)German
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objet nouveau des politiques publiques de mobilité, le RER Métropolitain constitue un instrument en voie de généralisation pour structurer les mobilités au sein des principales métropoles françaises. Ce travail étaye la « spécificité française » que représente l’absence de cet outil dans le paysage des mobilités en dehors de la région capitale, et ce en comparaison de l’ensemble des pays ouest européen, de tradition germanique, comme latine. La présente recherche analyse ensuite les dynamiques observables dans le processus d’appropriation du référentiel francilien, comme européen aujourd’hui à l’œuvre, en détaillant de manière plus approfondie le cas du RER lyonnais. Ce cas précis étant un révélateur important des logiques d'action multisectorielles et interscalaires (local/national, urbain/interurbain, technique/décisionnel) contraignant la réalisation effective de ces services ferroviaires aujourd’hui largement plébiscités. Ce travail s’appuie enfin sur l’étude de deux cas étrangers (Barcelone et Montréal) qui permettent d’interroger l’effectivité de la gouvernance métropolitaine des dessertes ferroviaires, comme le besoin de structuration des mobilités à une échelle nouvelle, et ce, suite au processus de métropolisation à l’œuvre depuis plusieurs décennies

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuetheses.fr (ABES)Same topicCross-Border Cooperation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207