MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317373960 · doi:10.1080/17460263.2022.2157868

A divided house: the foundation and evolution of the Supreme Council for Sport in Africa, 1965–2013

2023· article· en· W4317373960 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pascal Mamudou Camara

Bibliographic record

VenueSport in History · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoycottAgency (philosophy)PoliticsInterpretation (philosophy)Political scienceAmbush marketingLawSociologyGender studiesPublic administrationMedia studiesSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In July 1965, members of the Permanent Committee for the First African Games, from diverse backgrounds, met in Congo Brazzaville three days before the games and discussed the formation of a supranational sport organisation in the continent. The Supreme Council for Sport in Africa (SCSA) was formally constituted in Bamako as a voluntary sport organisation in 1966. In 1977, it assumed the status of an agency of the Organisation of African Unity, until its dissolution in 2013. The SCSA is best remembered for its fight against discrimination in sport; instigation of boycott threats and the boycott of the 1976 Montreal Olympic Games, and serving as the main host of the African Games. Based on hermeneutic enquiry, this research analysed archive materials from the International Olympic Committee Historical Archive and the SCSA in Africa Archive to establish a better understanding and interpretation of the internal and external divisions in which the SCSA operated. The historical enquiry provided evidence that, though the SCSA was not founded as a supranational governmental agency in sport, lack of a clear-cut vision and Africa’s political, economic and social realities hampered its efforts to effectively coordinate the development of sport in the continent.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSport in HistorySame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207