Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bien que les pratiques de réconciliation connaissent une longue histoire au Liban, celles-ci se diversifient à partir des années 1990. Elles constituent un important objet d’étude pour de nombreux académiciens et académiciennes ainsi que chercheurs et chercheuses ; elles sont devenues la cause commune d’une pléthore d’organismes non-gouvernementaux, d’associations civiles, de mouvements sociaux et d’artistes. Le thème de la réconciliation des Libanais et Libanaises sert aussi de cadre pour le discours politique. Cet article présente un état des lieux de ces pratiques en traitant premièrement de la relation de la réconciliation au dialogue interreligieux puis de la relation de la réconciliation à la mémoire nationale. Il présente par la suite certains exemples au sein de la société civile et identifie en conclusion quelques pistes de réflexion.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".