MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887260351 · doi:10.7202/1050546ar

Sécuritisation et logiques institutionnelles

2018· article· fr· W2887260351 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lucile Maertens

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis les années 1990, l’ Onu produit et diffuse un discours construisant l’environnement comme une menace contre la sécurité internationale. Ce processus de sécuritisation ne fait toutefois pas l’unanimité au sein d’une organisation internationale composée d’acteurs multiples aux stratégies différenciées. Quels sont les obstacles à la sécuritisation de l’environnement à l’ Onu ? Que nous apprennent-ils du processus de sécuritisation ? Comment l’exemple onusien nous renseigne-t-il sur la relation entre sécuritisation et logiques institutionnelles ? Cet article vise à répondre à ces questions à partir du cas de la sécuritisation de l’environnement à l’ Onu . Il dévoile les interactions entre logiques institutionnelles et sécuritisation, qu’il étudie à l’aune des obstacles rencontrés dans la construction discursive de la menace, dans la diffusion du cadrage sécuritaire et dans les pratiques de sécuritisation.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.316 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicGlobal Security and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207