Une nouvelle branche du droit international : Le droit international de la santé
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International health law is a soft law which is now reaching full maturity. It has gradually taken root since the middle of the 19th century, and it represents a synthesis of several disciplines (international work law, international social law, international humanitarian law, international medical law, international environment law, ...) International health law must be linked to international economic law and particularly to international development law. Moreover, it is mostly a Third-world law, especially since the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) caters first of all to the needs and demands of the developing nations. Thus it offers both an ideological and technical aspect which is very present in the concepts of New International Health Order and of Primarian Health Cares. W.H.O. must be considered as the main organization in the field of international public health, though, an international sanitary division has been established with both world organizations (mainly the United Nations System organizations), trans-regional, regional or sub-regional organizations, all with sanitary competence, as well as many non-governmental organizations with a sanitary purpose. The standardization process (general standards and ordinary standards) of international health law is nevertheless very advanced, and make international health law a half proclamatory and half executory law.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".