Sur le mythe colonial de l’inépuisabilité des ressources forestières (Afrique occidentale française / Afrique équatoriale française, 1900-1940)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le début du XXe siècle voit se forger le mythe de l'inépuisabilité de la ressource forestière africaine : de très vastes superficies forestières, d'une très grande richesse et se renouvelant « automatiquement » grâce à une importante dynamique végétale d'origine spontanée. Ce type d'exagération découle de tout un ensemble complexe de facteurs que nous nous proposons de mettre en évidence. Si une certaine méconnaissance des réalités du terrain peut se comprendre pour la période 1900-1920, la permanence d'un tel cliché jusqu'aux années 1930 relève d'une tromperie savamment orchestrée, à l'origine de bien des déboires humains et financiers. S'intéresser à ce mythe déjà ancien nous apparaît d'autant plus pertinent que l'inquiétude des scientifiques quant à la préservation des ressources forestières mondiales est toujours très vive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".