MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cotonou: Slowly Undoing Lomé's Concept of Partnership

2002· article· de· W2605797187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kunibert Raffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal für Entwicklungspolitik · 2002
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Politics and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUndoingGeneral partnershipPolitical scienceTreatyQuarter (Canadian coin)Law and economicsLawSociologyGeographyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Calling itself expressly a Partnership Agreement the new Treaty signed at Cotonou differs conspicuously from the former Lome Treaties, most conspicuously by the fact that declarations apart the idea of real partnership is now largely absent. After a quarter of a century the EU has finally been able to move decidedly towards the situation it had initially wanted when signing Lome I, but was unable to force on ACP countries then.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.020
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal für EntwicklungspolitikSame topicGlobal Politics and EconomyFrench-language works237,207