MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

(Re)penser la démocratie et la la société en Angola

2004· article· fr· W2106739782 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueÁfrica · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Identity, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La construction de la nation angolaise se caractérise par deux éléments essentiels qui constituent en même temps la base permanente de son unité: ladifférence comme recherche nécessaire d’une identité culturelle, fondement élémentaire de la création et du développement d’institutions nationales propres, et le différend, qui présuppose la possibilité et les principes qui doivent régir l’élaboration et l’application d’un projet social, national et populaire. La nation angolaise ne peut naître que de l’accord des différentes nations qui l’habitent. Elle n’est pas la somme automatique de ces dernières, comme le laissait supposer un certain rêve d’une unité centralisatrice effaçant toutes différences. La nation angolaise implique la reconnaissance des différences et des différends qui la peuplent, la construction d’un lieu et d’un moment propices à la participation et au partage du bien commun. Partant, nous ne dissocions pas la construction de la nation angolaise de celle de sa démocratie. La solution possible et viable est celle du pluralisme juridique inévitable. Une action dans ce domaine nous permet de constater que lasociété politique angolaise a seulement le monopole de la production du Droit “officiel”. Si le droit de “l’État” est le seul qui “existe” en Angola, alors l’État de Droit, comme démocratie, est un eautre illusion.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.336 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÁfricaSame topicMigration, Identity, and HealthFrench-language works237,207