MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516348569 · doi:10.3917/eg.301.0026

L'enclavement, réévaluation théorique et application à l'Afrique de l'Ouest

2001· article· fr· W1516348569 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueL’Espace géographique · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Transports
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé L’enclavement est une catégorie spatiale de référence. Mais, à force d’en user sans précaution, la question de sa pertinence finit par se poser. Il est donc nécessaire d’en ressaisir rigoureusement les significations dans toute leur richesse et leur diversité. Ce travail théorique est un préalable à l’étude des territoires dits enclavés, identifiés généralement par leur éloignement des réseaux dynamiques. Cette investigation trouve un champ d’application fécond dans l’espace de l’Afrique de l’Ouest. L’enclavement, posé comme la condition des difficultés de développement qui y sont concentrées, n’est pas un attribut spatial qui conformerait l’identité des territoires concernés à l’absolu d’une position continentale. C’est un processus relatif fondé sur des discontinuités produites par des mécanismes fondamentalement historiques et qui aboutit à des inversions territoriales. Ce sont les stratégies des acteurs publics et privés qui suscitent l’enclavement et ces stratégies sont réversibles.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.261 · 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