Quelle politique étrangère ? Étude critique sur les relations internationales du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Quebec est l’un des Etats federes les plus actifs en relations internationales. Toutefois, l’etude de ses activites exterieures presente tout de meme une certaine atonie. Disciplinairement ecartees, analytiquement restreintes «[l]es relations internationales du Quebec ont ete etudiees comme un sous-produit des relations internationales ». On peut alors imaginer, sur la base de cette affirmation du professeur Luc Bernier, l’attention portee, par la communaute scientifique, sur la nature de ces activites. Ce «sujet n’a ete qu’explore, particulierement dans sa dimension theorique », ecrivait la ministre Louise Beaudoin. En effet, il est rarement question, dans la litterature, d’exploration de la substance de cette activite quebecoise. Rares sont les chercheurs qui ont approfondi rigoureusement ce sujet. Quelle interpretation peut-on donner a cette activite internationale quebecoise ? Quels sont le contenu, la texture et la nature de cet objet ? Comment definir celui-ci ? Quels sont les reperes theoriques et conceptuels pour baliser scientifiquement les relations exterieures du Quebec ? Dans un contexte de scientificite, il est particulierement «legitime de s’interroger sur la teneur et la nature de cette action » quebecoise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".