MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986780572 · doi:10.1111/jcms.12976

In Search of Lost Time: Memory‐framing, Bilateral Identity‐making, and European Security

2019· article· en· W2986780572 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJCMS Journal of Common Market Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCyprus History, Politics, Society
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)GermanForeign policySecurity policyPolitical sciencePolitical economyLawSociologyPoliticsHistoryComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bilateral relations between France and either Germany or the UK are the backbone of European security and defence cooperation. From a strategic and cultural point of view, these relations are not self‐evident. In this article, we track the memory‐framing processes accompanying the creation of major bilateral initiatives. Leaders such as Adenauer and De Gaulle, Mitterrand and Kohl, Blair and Chirac, and Sarkozy and Cameron imagined bilateral communities of fate informed by mutually understandable historical memories: the World Wars for the Franco‐German relationship and the Empire for the Franco‐British relationship. Based on these memory frames, Franco‐German identity undergirds a policy‐based integration of core state powers while Franco‐British identity informs capacity‐building and force projection (a resource‐based integration). These bilateral identities led to earmarking national military forces for common purposes and intertwined defence industries. In some cases, they also provided an impetus for EU cooperation in the context of the Common Foreign and Security Policy or the Common Security and Defence Policy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.334 · 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