The Court of Justice and the social market economy: The emergence of an ideal and the conditions for its realization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reference to “social market economy” introduced in the Lisbon Treaty seems to fit with the political theory guiding the Court of Justice in its recent decisions in Viking and Laval . Through these judgments, the Court promotes the ideal of a European Community which integrates not only in economic but also in social terms. The article discusses the practical ways and the legal means by which it realizes this ideal. First, the Court first has to make clear the relevance of EC internal market law in the field of collective labour action (industrial action). The Court uses both the Directive on posted workers and the Treaty–based rights to economic freedom. Second, the Court has to reconcile market and social elements of the European integration. It uses a model of balancing of economic and social objectives. However, at both these two stages, difficulties arise.
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 | 0.022 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.078 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".