MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W767789018 · doi:10.71781/13404

Le Plan Nord du gouvernement du Québec : analyse du design, du positionnement et de la planification stratégique des projets d'infrastructures de transport

2014· dissertation· fr· W767789018 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philippe Brisson

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire fait l’état des lieux des projets de transport du Plan Nord du gouvernement du Québec. Son but est de déterminer si les infrastructures de transport prévues s’inscrivent en continuité avec le développement territorial du Québec sur le plan du design, du positionnement et de la planification. L’étude s’articule autour de quatre étapes. Tout d'abord une revue de littérature du Plan Nord, du développement du Nord québécois et méthodologique est réalisée. Ensuite, une analyse de design des infrastructures de transport est produite par le biais des schémas d'aménagement et documents de planification. Troisièmement, des entrevues réalisées avec les principaux acteurs concernés permettent de déterminer la composante du positionnement. Finalement, les projets du Plan Nord sont vérifiés par une méthode de planification stratégique hybride SWOT-PESTEL. L’étude démontre que bien que certains projets soient en adéquation sur les trois plans étudiés, d’autres s’inscrivent mal dans la démarche de planification stratégique.

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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→