MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601541856

The Bi-Polar World System and the Contradictions of African Independence: A Retrospective Reflection

2015· article· en· W1601541856 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frank N. Enor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependence (probability theory)IdeologyPolitical sciencePolitical economyDiplomacyProsperityModernityColonialismLawDevelopment economicsSociologyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cold War International system which polarized Europe and other world continents into two hostile camps: the West dominated by the United States and the East by the Soviet Union after 1945 had profound implications on African security, stability and independence. As response to Cold War diplomacy, Africa and other emergent states in the international system formulated the non-aligned movement as a way out of the ideological posturing of superpowers. Poverty and ideological deficiency undermined the non-aligned movement which states flirted between the two camps with dangerous consequences to the stability of their nation-states. African states which pursued independent paths to modernity and prosperity were either denied, neglected or destabilized; while others compromised their independence, collaborated with the forces of imperialism and became arrowheads in the hands of capitalist predators. This paper attempts an overview of the bi-polar world system and its implications for United States policy towards Africa between 1945 and 1990. Inter-alia, the paper posits that the continued chase for a place in the orbit of occidentalism from idealist viewpoint rather reinforces dependency than reconcile the contradictions of underdevelopment. The paper also decries the ideological deficiency and reechoes the call for African development to be anchored on an ideological beacon as a sure way of giving succor to its independence.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207