La France, le Canada et l'émergence du Québec sur la scène internationale. L'affaire de Libreville (1967-1968)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
« Inapproprié », « On ne s’ingère pas dans les affaires d’un pays ami ». C’est par ces remarques que la classe politique canadienne a accueilli les propos de l’ancienne candidate socialiste à l’élection présidentielle, lorsqu’elle s’est dit favorable à la souveraineté du Québec, le 23 janvier 2007. Réaction disproportionnée ? Pas vraiment : le statut du Québec est un sujet de tension perpétuelle entre Ottawa et Paris, depuis que Charles de Gaulle a lancé son fameux « Vive le Québec libre » du haut du balcon de l’hôtel de ville de Montréal, le 24 juillet 1967. Moins d’un an après, la conférence de Libreville de 1968 est l’occasion d’un nouvel accroc entre la France et le Canada avec le Québec comme arbitre. Cet article revient sur ce coup d’éclat du couple franco-québécois qui a profondément irrité le gouvernement central d’Ottawa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".