MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323441262 · doi:10.4000/elohi.769

La régulation de la circulation des savoirs autochtones en France et au Canada : entre immobilisme étatique et dynamisme infra-étatique

2014· article· fr· W2323441262 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueELOHI · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les savoirs autochtones ont été progressivement reconnus au niveau international et notamment dans la Convention sur la Diversité Biologique adoptée lors de la Conférence de Rio en 1992, mais aussi dans de nombreux autres textes internationaux. Pourtant à ce jour très peu d’États sont parvenus à mettre en œuvre ces traités. Beaucoup font preuve aujourd’hui d’un immobilisme paradoxal compte tenu des efforts considérables déployés en termes de négociation au niveau international depuis 1992 (c’est le cas de la France et du Canada). Cet immobilisme n’est pas pour autant synonyme d’absence de régulation étant donné le dynamisme normatif infra-étatique dont font preuve en particulier les autochtones et les chercheurs. Il est en effet possible d’observer une grande diversité d’initiatives déployées pour l’encadrement de la circulation des savoirs traditionnels associés. Dans cet article nous proposons de présenter une série d’initiatives innovantes menées en France et au Canada.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.213 · 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