MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W202735652 · doi:10.7202/702916ar

Continuité et adaptation : Les priorités stratégiques du gouvernement de la France

2005· article· en· W202735652 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Philippe Garigue

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsGL Chemtec International (Canada)Canadians Living with HIV
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonizationPolitical scienceSovereigntyContradictionConsolidation (business)PoliticsCompetence (human resources)Adaptation (eye)Public administrationLawBusinessManagementEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French strategic priorities have been marked since the Second World War by the need to maintain continuity in national identity while adapting to changing world conditions. This process has been successful because the French Government was able to achieve a « minimal » political consensus and prevent fondamental contradiction in goals from developing. It is now extending its priorities so as to achieve a new harmonization between national defence and the development of a European defence, while maintaining a role in the structuration of world security. However, the cost of defence is gradually demonstrating that a further adaptation is required, through the consolidation of European defence. Yet, while accepting some supranational transfers of competence, this adaptation is now raising the question of the capacity for the « minimal » consensus to be maintained while balancing national sovereignty against efficiency.

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)0.013
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicDefense, Military, and Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207