Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".