MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Colonial and Postcolonial Modernities in Two African Cities

2003· article· en· W2293306517 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Garth Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesEthnologyPromulgationArtSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La majorité des paysages urbains d’Afrique de l’Est et du Centre-Sud ont des origines relativement récentes et l’héritage du colonialisme britannique y est encore très évident. Pourtant, les stratégies coloniale et postcoloniale du modernisme urbain n’ont rencontré que des échecs. Cet article examine deux projets gouvernementaux de modernité urbaine: la construction de Lusaka dans les années 1930; et la construction de Lilongwe au Malawi dans les années 1960 et 1970. Le concept d’encadrement de Timothy Mitchell est appliqué pour permettre de comprendre comment et pourquoi ces états ont imposé des organisations physiques de l’espace susceptibles de leur permettre d’exercer leur pouvoir sans difficulté. Les études de cas illustrent aussi la manière dont les citadins africains ordinaires ont réorganisé leur espace, à l’intérieur même des contraintes imposées par les gouvernements d’oppression. Ces réactions offrent en exemple les solutions urbaines africaines offertes aux défis des modernités, solutions qui reposent sur la promulgation des idéologies religieuses, des coutumes et du pouvoir personnel.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.233 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africainesSame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207