MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072729964 · doi:10.3917/gmcc.223.0031

La relation Québec-Paris-Ottawa et la création de l'organisation internationale de la francophonie (1960-2005)

2006· article· fr· W2072729964 on OpenAlex
Stéphane Paquin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGuerres mondiales et conflits contemporains · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La relation Québec-Paris-Ottawa et la création de l’organisation internationale de la francophonie (1960-2005) C’est en 1880 que le géographe français Onésime Reclus invente le terme « francophonie », mais il faudra attendre 1986, soit cent six ans plus tard, pour que se tienne le premier Sommet de la Francophonie. Ces rencontres de pays de la Francophonie avaient été souhaitées depuis les années 1960 par le président du Sénégal, Léopold Sédar Senghor, par le président de la Tunisie, Habib Bourguiba, et le président du Niger, Hamani Diori. La création de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie sera une victime collatérale des relations politiques difficiles entre le gouvernement du Québec et d’Ottawa depuis la Révolution tranquille. Cet article retrace ici l’historique de la relation triangulaire Paris-Québec-Ottawa de la mise sur pied de l’Agence de coopération culturelle et technique à l’entente Mulroney-Johnson de 1985 qui permet au Québec de devenir un acteur décisionnel lors des sommets.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · 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