Tiers-mondisme et anti-tiers-mondisme. Table ronde
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que se redéfinissent les rapports de dépendance entre pays développés et pays du Tiers-monde, certains intervenants et penseurs occidentaux remettent en question l’idéologie tiers-mondiste et les modèles d’action qu’elle préconise. Si le débat semble engagé, au départ, entre les tenants de positions antinomiques, il ne s’inscrit pas moins dans une histoire qui est avant tout celle de la colonisation. En se référant à cette histoire, les participants à la table ronde apportent une série de nuances et de précisions pour y voir plus clair. Plusieurs dimensions sont interreliées. La crise économique mondiale, la consolidation de l’impérialisme, les luttes de libération nationale, de même que l’équilibre des rapports Nord-Sud sont au coeur de ce débat. Toutefois, les revendications des pays du Tiers-monde et les valeurs émancipatoires qui les portent apparaissent toujours légitimes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".