MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510864276

Bosphorus v. Ireland and the Protection of Fundamental Rights in Europe

2006· article· en· W1510864276 on OpenAlexaff
Alicia Hinarejos

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFundamental rightsConventionPolitical scienceHuman rightsLawDiscretionEuropean communityMember statesMember stateState (computer science)Meaning (existential)European unionInternational human rights lawState responsibilityLaw and economicsSociologyBusinessInternational tradePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Bosphorus v Ireland, the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) has clarified the conditions under which an EU Member State will be held responsible for a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights arising from EC law or its national implementation. The judgment sheds light on the role played by national discretion, as well as on the question of when and how the “equivalent protection” test will be applied to the European Community. This article provides a short reminder of the case law of the ECtHR concerning EC Member States’ responsibility for EC action and analyses the judgment in Bosphorus v Ireland and its meaning for the protection of fundamental rights in Europe.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0120.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicEuropean and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207