MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7038817107

Intégration européenne et pratique diplomatique : lâexpérience autrichienne (1987-2009)

2011· other· fr· W7038817107 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Identity (music)Frugality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire vise à élucider les implications de l’intégration européenne pour les diplomaties nationales. À partir d’une approche sociologique axée sur les pratiques des individus, une étude de cas est menée sur la diplomatie autrichienne, pour la période allant de 1987 à 2009. S’appuyant sur une vingtaine d’entretiens conduits en 2009 à Vienne, cette étude rend compte, d’une part, des changements engendrés par l’intégration européenne de l’Autriche au regard des pratiques et des représentations de ses diplomates concernant la politique de neutralité. D’autre part, nous relatons le processus d’adaptation des diplomates et du ministère des Affaires étrangères autrichiens aux exigences pratiques et aux dynamiques sociales de l’interaction diplomatique au sein de l’Union européenne (UE). En somme, notre étude montre que les diplomates impliqués dans la gestion des affaires (tant internes qu’externes) de l’UE convergent autour d’un certain nombre de règles et de représentations sociales; cette dynamique a des implications substantielles pour les diplomaties nationales intégrées relativement tardivement dans l’UE, comme ce fut le cas pour l’Autriche.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→French-language works237,207→