MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041903314 · doi:10.7202/030871ar

Governor versus Colonial Office: An Anatomy of the Richards Constitution for Nigeria, 1939 to 1945

2006· article· fr· W2041903314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Flint

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Papers · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesColonialismConstitutionOpposition (politics)ArtPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La constitution Richards a posé la base de tout le processus de décolonisation du Nigeria, voire même, de toute l'Afrique britannique. Pour la première fois, le pays entier était soumis à une même constitution et des assemblées régionales étaient établies. Le pays s'acheminait vers un statut fédéral et tout indiquait clairement que la décolonisation était amorcée. Toutefois, la façon dont elle fut imposée fit en sorte que les politiciens nationalistes refusèrent de s'y rallier. L'auteur examine ici les modes d'implantation différents que préconisèrent, à l'époque, le « Colonial Office » à Londres, d'une part, et le gouverneur Sir Arthur Richards, d'autre part. Il soutient, de fait, que la philosophie réactionnaire de Richards fut en opposition constante avec les idées mises de l'avant par le « Colonial Office ». Il démontre, de plus, que la résistance offerte par Richards a effectivement détruit les chances qu'avait la Grande Bretagne d'organiser et de diriger le mouvement nationaliste, voire même, que ce faisant, il a suscité l'apparition des partis nationalistes au Nigeria.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical PapersSame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207