MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W65228514 · doi:10.7202/702166ar

Interdependance, linkage et système international : de l'analyse conceptuelle aux problèmes de politique étrangère

2005· article· en· W65228514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Irnerio Seminatore

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationContext (archaeology)Linkage (software)International relationsInterpretation (philosophy)Political scienceCompetition (biology)EpistemologyPoliticsForeign policyHumanitiesSociologyPositive economicsEconomicsPhilosophyLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence and evolution of the literature dealing with interdependence in the international System is looked into. An attempt is made to show its significance and main points as well as its implications. The debates on interdependence within the North-American political context are regarded as solutions to the preceding issues on dependence. Interesting passages are dedicated to the impact of the interdependence theory on the interpretation of the international system, as illustrated by two schools of thought in foreign policy (Kissinger-Brzezinski). Linkage of the tactical and strategic aspects to the economic and political interrelation of international relations, as put forward by policy makers, has brought to the fore the difficulties and limits of negotiation in the face of competition and in the aftermath of confrontation. This paper offers subtle, yet positive, conclusions on the use of the interdependance theory in international policy.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.032
Scholarly communication0.0140.023
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207