Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au sein des régions périphériques du Québec riches de leurs ressources naturelles, les divers territoires de gestion doivent affronter une double transition multidimensionnelle. Ils recherchent d’abord un nouvel élan régional vigoureux pour rompre les tendances négatives, notamment démographiques, de l’actuel contre-cycle structurel. Aussi, ces territoires doivent relever des impératifs environnementaux majeurs aux conséquences nombreuses. Considérant ces deux défis collectifs a priori incompatibles, ce texte questionne les arrangements institutionnels hérités des politiques publiques territoriales évolutives dans cette périphérie depuis la décennie 1960. À cet effet, la planification illustre une série de pratiques successives aux effets bénéfiques. Non optimale cependant, un important potentiel latent demeure en matière de conception et d’appropriation de leviers de développement. Un nouvel équilibre procédural devient nécessaire en planification territoriale afin de bien relever les enjeux de l’avenir immédiat.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".