MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405422813 · doi:10.7202/1114973ar

Les politiques de financement et les enjeux de coopération multilatérale dans le domaine du théâtre au Cameroun

2024· article· fr· W4405422813 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ginette Ngo Mintoogue

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Gouvernance · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesFrenchArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les politiques et l’action publiques en Afrique subsaharienne francophone soulèvent des questions quant à leur légitimité et leur efficacité. Ces questions sont généralement analysées à travers le prisme de la gouvernance et de la qualité de l’appareil administratif, ainsi que de leur impact sur les populations concernées. Dans le domaine du théâtre en Afrique subsaharienne francophone, et plus particulièrement au Cameroun, pays bilingue (le français et l’anglais sont les deux langues officielles), on observe un déséquilibre entre les mesures de financement étatiques et l’importance des subventions étrangères. Cette situation entraîne des conséquences néfastes sur le développement de l’activité théâtrale et la situation économique des artistes. Cette étude vise à examiner comment se structure cette politique de financement dans un contexte de crise du financement public des arts, et à analyser les relations entre ces organismes de financement et le Cameroun. Elle expose la portée de cette collaboration avec les pays du Nord et les organismes de coopération tels que la francophonie, l’UNESCO, la Banque mondiale, la Commission internationale pour le théâtre francophone (CITF), GIZ, l’Union européenne, la Commission européenne, les Instituts français et Goethe ainsi que les ambassades, tant pour les pays d’Afrique francophone (dont le Cameroun) que pour les artistes, principaux intervenants engagés dans cette question.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue GouvernanceSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207