MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2308013956 · doi:10.4000/chrhc.4956

La « Nueva Conquista »

2016· article· fr· W2308013956 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Françoise Escarpit

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers d’histoire Revue d’histoire critique · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cinq cent vingt-trois ans après l’arrivée de Christophe Colomb aux Amériques et à quelque cinq cents ans du déferlement des Cortés, Pizarro, Ponce de Léon et autres conquistadores à la recherche de l’Eldorado, l’Amérique latine fait face à une nouvelle et sauvage conquête, celle de ses ressources naturelles. Les nouveaux conquérants ont pour nom BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Eon, Jeco Corporation, GDF-Suez, Total, Chevron, State Grid… Ils sont étatsuniens, chinois, français, australiens, canadiens, japonais, britanniques, hollandais… Ce pillage, notamment du sous-sol (minerais et hydrocarbures), se fait avec l’accord complice des gouvernements, quelle que soit leur couleur politique, et rarement avec celui des populations concernées. Que l’on soit dans le páramo colombien, l’Amazonie brésilienne ou bolivienne, les Andes chiliennes ou les terres paysannes du Sud mexicain, les effets de ces politiques sont ravageurs pour la biodiversité et pour les habitants de ces terres. Seule la destination des royalties qui en résultent est différente. Investissement social contre investissement libéral. Peut-on néanmoins penser que, au-delà du discours, des résistances, des luttes et des contradictions, il existe des alternatives et des chemins nouveaux porteurs d’espoir ?

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.030
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers d’histoire Revue d’histoire critiqueSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207