MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404241952 · doi:10.7202/1114270ar

Francopol, un espace renouvelé ou parmi d’autres de l’histoire de la coopération policière internationale ?1

2024· article· fr· W4404241952 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jonas Campion

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin d histoire politique · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal Systems and Institutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Francopol est un réseau de coopération entre polices actives dans des espaces francophones qui a été fondé en 2008, après une longue phase de maturation. Sa naissance a notamment été portée par des acteurs québécois, à la suite des réformes de la formation policière dans la province et dans le cadre d’une politique internationale volontariste. Dans cet article, nous dressons l’histoire de cette naissance et de l’activité du réseau, et tentons par ce biais de le replacer dans une perspective longue de logiques de coopérations entre polices pour en comprendre les termes, les activités et les effets. Il s’agit de déterminer si et à quel titre Francopol est original par rapport à des structures antérieures ou toujours actives de coopération. Sur la base des archives de l’association et d’une démarche d’histoire orale menée avec certains de ses acteurs initiaux, les points abordés sont multiples : l’aspect linguistique et l’éclatement géographique du réseau, la signification de la formation policière et, enfin, les logiques de gestion et de circulation de l’information entre les membres de Francopol.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin d histoire politiqueSame topicLegal Systems and InstitutionsFrench-language works237,207