MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047807823 · doi:10.1017/s0008423914000924

Faire la guerre pour un Mali démocratique : l'intervention militaire française et la gestion des possibilités politiques contestées

2014· article· fr· W2047807823 on OpenAlexaff
Bruno Charbonneau, Jonathan Sears

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Studies and Geopolitics
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Le 11 janvier 2013, le président François Hollande justifiait une intervention militaire française au Mali sur la possibilité de l'effondrement de l'État malien face à une rébellion armée dans le Nord du pays. La guerre était ainsi autorisée et expliquée par l'incapacité de l'État malien à répondre à la menace. Ces explications et analyses centrées sur les enjeux sécuritaires cachent plus qu'elles ne révèlent, notamment les objectifs ontologiques de la guerre et ses enjeux identitaires. Afin de les révéler, cet article articule l'interaction entre le déploiement de la violence internationale et la construction d'un État et d'un imaginaire politique maliens. Nous concluons que la paix au Mali en 2013 a été recherchée par la militarisation de la gouvernance démocratique, avec pour effet de consolider le modèle de gouvernance d'avant-guerre. Contrairement aux analyses axées sur la sécurité, cet article démontre que les frontières et les limites du conflit malien ne sont pas seulement territoriales, mais identitaires et idéologiques.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

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 studies0.0090.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicAfrican Studies and GeopoliticsFrench-language works237,207