L'impossible confiance mutuelle ? L'Iran et la communauté internationale, entre passé trouble et avenir incertain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La reconduction jusqu’en novembre 2014 du plan d’action conjoint (JPOA) signé entre l’Iran et le groupe 5 + 1 (États-Unis, Chine, Russie, France, Allemagne, Royaume- Uni) permet aux négociateurs de gagner du temps afin de conclure un accord final, qui pourrait mettre fin à plus d’une décennie de crise du nucléaire iranien. Mais les concessions faites dans le cadre de cet accord par l’Iran, qui a accepté le ralentissement de ses activités d’enrichissement et la mise sous contrôle renforcée de ses sites nucléaires, comme par la communauté internationale, qui a reconnu le droit iranien à enrichir de l’uranium et a consenti à l’abandon de certaines sanctions en échange du JPOA, ne suffisent pas à rétablir la confiance multilatérale. En effet, le poids du passé et les engagements sécuritaires de chaque camp compromettent l’aboutissement d’un accord final ambitieux, pourtant seule voie de sortie d’une confrontation qui dure depuis des années.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".