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 OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie C. Hofmann, Frédéric Mérand

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.022
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCMS Journal of Common Market StudiesSame topicCyprus History, Politics, SocietyFrench-language works237,207