MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082910488 · doi:10.1177/1468795x10379676

Tocqueville on the conquest and colonization of Algeria

2010· article· en· W2082910488 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Classical Sociology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCONQUESTPoliticsColonialismEnthusiasmEmpireReputationHistoryPolitical scienceEthnologyEconomic historySociologyAncient historyPolitical economyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the 1830s and 1840s the future of France’s new colony in Algeria became Tocqueville’s chief preoccupation in politics. At first confident that settlers from Europe would mix with the natives of Algeria, eventually he lost his belief in an integrated colonial society. Yet he never abandoned his opinion that France must consolidate its hold over Algeria for reasons of strategy and international reputation. He deplored the pre-eminence of military men over the political affairs of the young colony but accepted and even praised their manner of waging war against the Algerian people. Nostalgia motivated Tocqueville’s enthusiasm for empire, but contemporary influences shaped his views on the policies his country should adopt for the conquest and colonization of Algeria.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.313 · 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