MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

State, Ethnic Militias, and Conflict in Nigeria

2005· article· fr· W126961956 on OpenAlex
Austine Ikelegbe

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Conflict and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEthnologySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article examine le phénomène de groupements ethniques de milices, la raison de leur émergence ainsi que leurs rôles objectifs et leurs activités. Il cherche à identifier la manière dont le caractère et la nature de l’Etat nigérian, la configuration du pouvoir ethnique ou de l’hégémonie, la démocratisation, la crise économique et d’autres facteurs se répercutent sur, ou sous-tendent le phénomène des milices ethniques. Il examine les facteurs sous-jacents des déploiements de milices ethniques contre l’état d’une part et d’autres groupements ethniques d’autre part, ainsi que la nature et l’envergure des confrontations. La nature des réactions de l’état à la formation de groupes de milices et à leurs activités, ainsi que la manière dont ces réactions ont affecté le phénomène des milices sont également étudiées. Enfin, l’article recommande des politiques et offre des perspectives pour la gestion des milices ethniques, des conflits ethniques et de la violence.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.236 · 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