Quel avenir pour Israël? Entretien avec Yves Charles Zarka, Jeffrey Andrew Barash et Elhanan Yakira
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quel avenir pour Israël? Entretien avec Yves Charles Zarka, Jeffrey Andrew Barash et Elhanan Yakira, Shlomo Ben-Ami, Paris : Presses Universitaires de France, 2001, 362 p. Depuis l'éclatement de la deuxième Intifada, en septembre 2000, l'échec du processus de paix israélo-palestinien n'est plus une potentialité mais un fait. Comment sortir de cette impasse et réamorcer un dialogue entre Israéliens et Palestiniens? La question est d'autant plus actuelle que la stabilité au Moyen-Orient dépend en grande partie de la résolution du conflit israélo-arabe. Dans cet ouvrage, Shlomo Ben-Ami, ancien ministre israélien des affaires étrangères, réfléchit à l'échec des négociations et aux contours de toute solution future. Car, en dépit de son pessimisme actuel, M. Ben-Ami tranche en faveur de la paix. La solution du conflit israélo-palestinien ne peut, selon lui, être que politique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".