MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W124218144 · doi:10.7202/702006ar

Des acteurs transnationaux dans le développement latino-américain

2005· article· en· W124218144 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lawrence R. Alschuler

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations in Latin America
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)AutonomyPolitical scienceSociologyPoliticsLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our aim in this article is to identify the major transnational actors and to describe how they have influenced Latin American politics and development from the 1950s to the present. Transnational actors are defined as those collective actors (here non-governmental) whose membership and activities are transnational. Specifically ex-amined are the multinationals, the Catholic Church, international labor confederations, and guerrilla movements. The historical context within which we study these actors has two periods : early import substitution (1954-65) and late import substitution and export substitution (1965 to present). In each period the state pursue s a development strategy with the support of particular class alliances. For each period we describe how the transnational actors contribute to the successes and failures of these strategies. The causal relations are also reciprocal, for the actors evolve and adapt to the changing developmental context. For example, the multinationals shift from raw material extraction to manufacturing while the Church shifts from conservatism to the theology of liberation. The general trends in the activities of transnational actors over the post war period are interpreted with respect to the twin polarities of the development process : opression - liberation, integration - autonomy.

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 categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicInternational Relations in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207