Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suite au génocide du Rwanda, plusieurs acteurs internationaux ont entrepris une remise en question qui a notamment eu pour effet d’amorcer, au sein dela communauté internationale, un désir de passer d’une ‘culture de réaction à une culture de prévention’ (ONU, Rapport sur la prévention des conflits, 2001). L’un des impacts de cette réflexion a été le développement rapide d’un certain nombre « d’outils » visant à analyser les interactions entre les interventions de développement et les dynamiques du conflit. Ces outils ont créé un engouement tant au sein des agences donatrices que des organisations non gouvernementales (ONG), qui les ont adaptés et intégrés à leurs besoins organisationnels. Face à cette utilisation à grande échelle, les distinctions initiales entre les outils ont perdu de leur précision et tous sont maintenant généralement retrouvés sous le terme d’approches « sensibles aux conflits » (Paffenholz, 2009).
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 | 0.024 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".