MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004721060 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2010.9695765

Emerging forms of power in two African borderlands a theoretical and empirical research outline

2010· article· en· W2004721060 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Hüsken, Georg Klute

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)Empirical researchPolitical scienceSociologyManagement scienceEpistemologyEconomicsPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The transformation of statehood is a frequently debated topic in studies dealing with globalization. This is particularly true with regard to the African continent; here, the “building” of the nation‐state has been confronted, more than anywhere else, with a number of challenges. At times and in certain areas, state structures even collapsed, and thus transformed contemporary Africa into the symbol of state failure. In particular the peripheries and borderlands of many post‐colonial states in Africa contribute to the emergence of local stateless forms of power, which seem to suggest the end of the globalized statehood utopia. Are these new forms of political organization only a reaction to uncertainty caused by the weakness or even the absence of state structures? Will these orders be able to substitute the State in the long run? Or are global processes confronted with persisting local representations and practises of order and rule, indicating that stateless societies can resist the overwhelming power of the “Leviathan"? Can the longevity of local political models lead to the transformation of the state as the only and unique model of organised power? Or do they foreshadow a specific form of interlacement between non‐state actors and the state that will lead to heterarchical political settings in Africa and elsewhere? And finally: in which respect do borderland‐situations contribute to these processes?

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.411 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207