MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1501858113 · doi:10.3917/gen.065.0138

Jurys populaires et juges professionnels en France

2006· article· fr· W1501858113 on OpenAlex
Angèle Christin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGenèses · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedieval and Early Modern Justice
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<titre>R&#233;sum&#233;</titre>Comment analyser le jugement p&#233;nal&#160;? L&#8217;article part de l&#8217;opposition entre jugement professionnel et jugement profane lors du face-&#224;-face entre magistrats et jur&#233;s dans les jurys populaires en cours d&#8217;assises depuis 1790. Cependant les diff&#233;rences entre autonomie du jugement professionnel et encastrement dans le social du jugement profane sont peu &#224; peu nuanc&#233;es. C&#8217;est finalement la perspective des juges envers celui qui est jug&#233; qui se r&#233;v&#232;le &#234;tre un crit&#232;re valable de compr&#233;hension du jugement.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.294 · 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