MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808148168

Le rôle des ONG dans la Convention d'Ottawa

2015· book· fr· W2808148168 on OpenAlex
Pascal Rapillard

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEditions universitaires europeennes eBooks · 2015
Typebook
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En 2015, des femmes, des enfants, des civils continuent a mourir sous l'effet des mines antipersonnel, dont certaines ont ete posees il y a plusieurs decennies. Cependant, le nombre de nouvelles victimes est en constante diminution depuis l'adoption, en 1997, d'un traite qui interdit les mines antipersonnel. Les temoignages de medecins, infirmiers, secouristes travaillant sur le terrain, dans les pays touches, ont contribue a rassembler un mouvement international contre ces armes. L’influence, a la tete de ce mouvement, d'un groupement d'ONG reunissant des organisations humanitaires, fut determinante dans le cadre du processus d'Ottawa qui aboutit a l'adoption d'une Convention d'interdiction totale des mines antipersonnel. Par ailleurs, les ONG ont un veritable role dans le suivi et la mise en œuvre de cette Convention qui a contribue a reduire drastiquement - mais pas encore totalement - le nombre de nouvelles victimes de mines antipersonnel.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.265 · 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