MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2687279230 · doi:10.3917/ripc.233.0285

Les régions européennes face à la crise : une grille de lecture comparative

2017· article· fr· W2687279230 on OpenAlexaff
Alistair Cole, Romain Pasquier, Christian Visscher

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale de politique comparée · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesCentralisationArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Partant d’une analyse de l’impact de la crise sur les modes de gouvernance territoriale en Europe (en Allemagne, Belgique, Espagne, France et au Royaume Uni) l’objectif de ce dossier est de mettre à jour les processus de convergence et de divergence qui émergent dans la fabrique contemporaine des territoires européens. Le contexte de la crise, budgétaire et des dettes souveraines, depuis 2008, a intensifié la pression sur les États pour que ceux-ci procèdent à des économies budgétaires et introduisent de nouveaux dispositifs législatifs pour s’adapter aux exigences de l’européanisation normative. Les articles dans ce dossier thématique adresse le paradoxe d’une décentralisation croissante à travers de nombreux pays européens et une recentralisation par les instruments d’action publique, un mouvement qui parait renforcé par les effets directs et indirects de la crise économique. Le dossier ouvre ainsi de nouvelles façons d’étudier la gouvernance territoriale en se concentrant sur les conséquences inattendues de décisions à plusieurs niveaux sur ce qui reste essentiellement un processus endogène de décentralisation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale de politique comparéeSame topicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political StudiesFrench-language works237,207