L'autre dans les Cahiers des droits de l'homme, 1920-1940 : une sélection universaliste de l'altérité à la Ligue des droits de l'homme et du Citoyen en France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This doctoral dissertation examines the position of the Other with regard to the Ligue des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen (LDH) in France during the interwar period of the twentieth century. A key institution of French political and intellectual life, the Ligue des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen exemplified the confrontation and contradiction between theory, discourse, and reality. The dissertation is divided into two parts: the first part introduces Them, the members of the Ligue; while the second part describes (or identifies) the Other, the colonized migrants, the foreigners, the political and ethnic refugees of the interwar period. This research demonstrates that, although in theory these groups were considered equal in the name of universalism, in practice the discourse of the Ligue discriminated against them. The evidence shows that the members of the Ligue des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen despised all foreigners, and established the level of discrimination according to a hierarchy of contempt.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".