France and Algeria: A History of Decolonization and Transformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phillip Naylor describes the extraordinary bilateral relationship between France and Algeria, countries which - after 132 years of colonialism and a brutal war of independence - have attempted to fashion a new relationship based on mutual respect. Beginning with a review of the colonial period up to 1958, Naylor examines the various dramas that have distinguished bilateral relations since independence: the Evian Accords of March 1962, the substitution of cooperation for colonialism, the nationalization of the hydrocarbons sector in 1971, and the Fitna, Algeria's violent trial of itself as a nation during the '90s. Recognizing many contradictions and complexities in the period of decolonization, Naylor melds philosophy, economics, sociology, political science, and literary criticism into his historical narrative. Readers will find an impressive range of subject matter and methodologies brought to bear on the evolving relations of power, preception and identity between the two states. In the voluminous literature covering France's relationship with Algeria, the bilateral postcolonial history has been marginalized, if not neglected. Naylor offers a widely and deeply researched account of this period, and of the exceptional relationship between France and Algeria as the former continues to ascribe strategic importance to Algeria while the latter struggles to transform and escape the residual influence of its colonial past.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".