MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983441707 · doi:10.4000/histoire-cnrs.1573

Questions de géopolitique ou la géopolitique en question

2007· article· fr· W1983441707 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Encel

Bibliographic record

VenueLa Revue pour l’histoire du CNRS · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre de Géomatique du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La géopolitique n’est pas une science. En France, elle n’est même pas répertoriée au CNRS ou dans les commissions de spécialistes, et doit, depuis seulement quelques années, se contenter de figurer au registre « géographie » dans la spécialité « géographie géopolitique ». Frédéric Encel revient sur une discipline en quête de « légitimité » auprès des instances universitaires et de recherche.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.038
Scholarly communication0.0140.023
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0110.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLa Revue pour l’histoire du CNRSSame topicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political StudiesFrench-language works237,207