MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985318413 · doi:10.7202/038280ar

La France et l’otan

2009· article· fr· W1985318413 on OpenAlex
Dominique David

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesAlliancePolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’héritage des relations France- otan consiste en une profonde adhésion à la solidarité atlantique, une méfiance vis-à-vis d’un fonctionnement de l’Alliance trop dominé par Washington et une vive déception vis-à-vis d’une adaptation de l’après-guerre froide jugée frileuse. Ces relations ont pourtant été marquées depuis 1992 par un constant rapprochement. Aujourd’hui, le paradoxe est sans doute que l’Alliance apparaît aux Français à la fois plus nécessaire et plus incompréhensible dans son rôle et ses ambitions. Le « vrai-faux retour » dans le système militaire de l’ otan ne résoudra pas ce problème. Seul un débat de fond sur l’avenir de l’Alliance pourrait donner leur sens aux décisions du président Sarkozy. Faute de quoi ces dernières pourraient n’avoir qu’un effet d’image.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.336 · 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