MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098329798 · doi:10.4000/belgeo.43757

Coopération politique et intégration régionale en Arctique : naissance, développement et critique d’une région

2020· article· fr· W3098329798 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBELGEO · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceCONTESTHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, nous montrons que la coopération politique instituée « par le haut » en Arctique à la fin de la Guerre froide a mené à une intégration régionale institutionnelle. Cette dernière s’est centrée autour de la protection de l’environnement, qui paraît cependant être avant tout un prétexte politique. Nous comprenons en effet la région comme un outil politique, utilisé par les États circumpolaires pour restreindre de plus en plus le périmètre de décision régional. En retour, ce modèle de gouvernance fermée est remis en cause par de nouveaux acteurs, en particulier fédéraux (Québec) mais aussi étatiques internationaux ou autochtones, qui tentent d’élargir les limites de la région avec de nouvelles formes de gouvernance plus ouvertes. Les stratégies des acteurs qui dessinent une gouvernance multiniveau et enchevêtrée forment une région par intersection aux limites floues et contestées.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.324 · 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