MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408784959 · doi:10.1080/00083968.2025.2455712

L’industrie du kidnapping au Nigeria : une mise en perspective historique

2025· article· fr· W4408784959 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Research Studies Overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce commentaire décrypte les inquiétudes et les analyses que suscite l’industrie du kidnapping au Nigeria. Dans un premier temps, il montre les limites de recherches académiques parfois trop sensibles à la dramatisation des médias relativement à un phénomène qui est présenté comme inédit. Sur le plan méthodologique, l’article met également en lumière des problèmes de définition et de mesure statistique. Les confusions entretenues à propos des kidnappings soulignent alors la nécessité d’une perspective historique sur l’esclavage. Des récurrences apparaissent lorsqu’on s’intéresse aux logiques économiques des ravisseurs et aux narratifs discriminants à l’égard des étrangers. Étant donné leur ampleur et leur impact, les kidnappings d’aujourd’hui ne sont cependant pas comparables à la traite et il serait bien hasardeux de soutenir qu’ils seraient plus ou moins criminels ou politiques.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.247 · 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