Securite nationale et securite globale: l'adaptation des services de renseignements francais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, all intelligence services have been encouraged to reorganize, based on the conclusion that their ability to respond to new types of threats was limited. In France, the impetus for change has been twofold. The intelligence services of the ministries of defence and the interior are being asked to cooperate more effectively while remaining secret services. At the same time, a new rhetoric of "global security," originating in prefecture offices, seems to have taken root in support of the push for change. The author examines the premises underlying these phenomena, drawing on classified documents. While actual practices are not questioned, the author outlines the nature of the changes sought in the state bureaucracy, which must be carefully kept beyond citizens' control. Depuis les attentats américains de 2001, tous les services de renseignement ont été invités à se réorganiser, constat ayant été dressé de leur mauvaise réactivité à l'égard des nouvelles menaces. En France, deux phénomènes se jouent simultanément : les services de renseignement des ministères de la Défense et de l'Intérieur sont invités à coopérer plus efficacement tout en restant secrets. Une grammaire novatrice dite de la « sécurité globale », issue des cercles préfectoraux, semble accompagner cette intention. L'article en interroge les prémisses à l'aide de documents restés confidentiels. Faute d'interroger les pratiques réelles, la présente réflexion esquisse la nature des changements souhaités dans les bureaucraties régaliennes de l'é tat, dont le contrôle citoyen doit rester soigneusement dépossédé.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".