MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037465375

Dynamiques de développement territorial de MRC au Québec et contribution du secteur privé : études de cas comparatives

2006· report· fr· W7037465375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2006
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Identity (music)Order (exchange)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’objectif principal du projet intitulé « Dynamiques de développement territorial de MRC au Québec et contribution du secteur privé : études de cas comparatives » est\nd’identifier les facteurs influençant la dynamique territoriale des Municipalités régionales de comtés (MRC) afin de mieux comprendre les contraintes et les conditions de succès du développement des communautés rurales. Cet objectif ambitieux est poursuivi en mettant à contribution trois approches de recherche (annexe 1) et en comparant quatre MRC, dont deux, soit les MRC de Drummond et celle de Memphrémagog, désignées, eu égard aux indicateurs traditionnels de développement, comme des MRC performantes (fort développement) et deux autres, celles de Papineau et du Fjord-du-Saguenay, définies comme des MRC problématiques (fort potentiel1). Le contexte du passage au libre-échange canado-américain en 1988, puis à celui de l’ALÉNA en 1994 devenait un marqueur temporel afin de mesurer les modifications survenues avant et après 1991, année de recensement statistique.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.014
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207