Rethinking the Rwandan Narrative for the 25th Anniversary
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-five years after the notorious genocide of Rwanda’s Tutsi, heated arguments still prevail about key aspects of the event. At the moment, the greatest dispute concerns the behavior of the Rwanda Patriotic Front, the mostly-Tutsi rebel group that drove the genocidaires from the country and ended up ruling Rwanda to this day. The prevailing school of historiography, one embraced by a majority of scholars and promoted ceaselessly by the RPF government under President Paul Kagame, sees the RPF army as an exemplary, well-trained, and highly disciplined force, the very antithesis of the genocidaires. But a growing group of scholars and journalists now insist that the RPF were in every way as cruel, vicious, and murderous as were the anti-Tutsi conspirators themselves. This paper examines these arguments and makes some recommendations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it