Le Canada et les Amériques : une politique plombée par la doctrine Monroe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présente chronique est divisée en trois sections. La première replacera dans son contexte historique l’opposition centrale qui divise les Amériques jusqu’à ce jour, celle entre la vision hégémonique des États-Unis d’Amérique (EUA) et la vision de Bolivar. À cette fin, il sera aussi bien question du Traité de Gand de 1814, de la déclaration de Monroe de 1823, connue plus tard sous le nom de « doctrine Monroe », que de leurs effets sur le Canada. La deuxième section cherchera à illustrer certains des développements faits antérieurement en s’attardant sur le rôle du Canada en tant que promoteur de la démocratie. Quant à la troisième section, elle propose un tour d’horizon rapide de la conjoncture actuelle dans les Amériques, afin de mettre en lumière à quel point la fracture induite par la doctrine Monroe et sa réplique bolivarienne traverse encore et toujours le continent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".