Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le maintien de la paix multilatéral est, de plus en plus fréquemment, le moyen par lequel la communauté internationale répond aux conflits violents, qu’ils soient internes ou entre États. L’étude du maintien de la paix requiert des investigations transnationales et multi-sites dont l’importance est croissante en anthropologie. En dépit de ce fait, peu d’études anthropologiques du maintien de la paix ont été réalisées. Cet article prolonge un programme ininterrompu de recherche anthropologique sur le maintien de la paix. Il utilise la théorie de l’inversion psychologique pour interpréter des données ethnographiques recueillies par l’Organisme des Nations Unies chargé de la surveillance de la trêve (ONUST). Dans le maintien de la paix, les actions individuelles sont liées, dans un processus d’implications mutuelles, à des schémas à grande échelle de légitimité et d’efficacité du maintien de la paix. L’analyse présentée ici crée un échafaudage théorique permettant de connecter l’analyse des motivations au niveau individuel à un exposé de l’inversion culturelle dans le maintien de la paix à de plus hauts niveaux d’organisation sociale.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".