MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017643116 · doi:10.7202/704130ar

L’antiaméricanisme des opposants à la participation française à la guerre contre la République fédérale yougoslave

2005· article· fr· W2017643116 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Renéo Lukić

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article examine la polémique qu'ont provoquée en France les bombardements de VOTAN contre la République fédérale de Yougoslavie (RFY) au début de 1999. Plusieurs politiciens et intellectuels, de la gauche à la droite, ont dénoncé l'intervention de VOTAN comme étant illégale et illégitime. Toutefois, selon l'auteur, la plupart des critiques dirigées contre VOTAN étaient imprégnées d'un virulent antiaméricanisme. Les élites politiques françaises opposées aux bombardements contre la RFY ont perçu le conflit comme une nouvelle manifestation de la volonté des États-Unis d'imposer leur volonté à l'Europe. En fait, les critiques de VOTAN semblaient peu intéressés par les souffrances du million de Kosovars déportés par les Serbes. Leur principale préoccupation était plutôt de savoir comment cette guerre affecterait le statut international de la France. En adoptant cette attitude, les opposants à la guerre au Kosovo se sont faits les alliés objectifs de la politique « génocidaire » de Milosevic au Kosovo.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicPeacebuilding and International SecurityFrench-language works237,207