MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969092353 · doi:10.4000/conflits.1917

L’humanitaire comme norme du discours au Conseil de sécurité: une pratique légitimatrice socialement sanctionnée

2005· article· fr· W1969092353 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

VenueCultures & conflits/Cultures et conflits · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsAmbrose University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article examine les logiques pratiques qui ont favorisé la « normalisation » de l’invocation de l’idée humanitaire à l’ONU, à partir du cas des pratiques discursives de la délégation française au sein du Conseil de sécurité, à propos du conflit au Rwanda. L’analyse constructiviste des normes inspirée par A. Giddens et N. Onuf éclaire les enjeux de sanction sociale quotidienne qui se greffent à de telles pratiques discursives et les fondements de leur valeur proprement légitimatrice, qui tient en l’espèce à l’implication d’un espace social plus vaste que le seul espace diplomatique international, comprenant également des journalistes, des leaders d’opinion et des porte-parole légitimes de l’idée humanitaire très médiatisés.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.304 · 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