De l'explication à la prévision : analyse des perspectives en matière de relations internationales des régions d'Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si l'existence de relations extérieures des régions d'Europe est aujourd'hui largement reconnue, les différences de vue quant à la nature, l'explication, l'évaluation et la prévision du phénomène sont substantielles. Face à la complexité croissante du jeu international pratiqué par les différents niveaux de pouvoir en Europe et la croissance de la production scientifique sur le sujet, le premier objectif de cet article est d'offrir des clés de lecture: il suggère l'utilisation de quatre modèles (néo-réaliste, économie politique internationale, fédéral et post-moderne) comme points de référence pour organiser la présentation de cette littérature. L'examen critique et la comparaison des principales contributions théoriques ainsi organisées permettent ensuite de proposer plusieurs pistes de réflexion d'ordre épistémologique et méthodologique sur l'état de la question.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".