MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126267330 · doi:10.26443/firr.v11i1.53

Political Discourse in the Maghreb: An Analysis of Amazigh Identity in Algeria and Morocco

2021· article· en· W3126267330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueFlux International Relations Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHispanic-African Historical Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPluralPoliticsIndigenousIndependence (probability theory)Identity (music)Ethnic groupPolitical instabilityGeographyEthnologyPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Imazighen (plural of Amazigh) are an indigenous group primarily located in Northern and Western Africa. While Amazigh communities are present across the Maghreb, the role of Amazigh identity in Morocco and Algeria is of particular interest given each country's distinct treatment of ethnic and linguistic minorities. In Algeria, Amazigh identity is not as overtly politicized as in Morocco, wherein Amazigh communities are often at the forefront of public discourses and are often scapegoated as a source of political instability. Compared to Morocco, Algerian Imazighen generally experience higher acceptance levels due to numerous social, political, historical, and geographic factors that underpin the treatment and perceptions of Amazighté in Morocco and Algeria today. This article analyzes Algeria and Morocco's respective independence movements, political systems, language laws, and geographic topography to link the contemporary role of Amazigh identity to each national setting's unique history, politics, and geography.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlux International Relations ReviewSame topicHispanic-African Historical RelationsFrench-language works237,207