MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1785335792 · doi:10.7202/1015132ar

Le droit international humanitaire face aux défis du XXI siècle, Abdelwahab Biad et Paul Tavernier, 2012, Belgique, Bruylant, 325 p. (Collection du credho)

2013· article· fr· W1785335792 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Noémie Latendresse-Desmarais

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le droit international humanitaire face aux défis du XXIe siècle, Abdelwahab Biad et Paul Tavernier, 2012, Belgique, Bruylant, 325 p. (Collection du credho). Un article de la revue Études internationales (Volume 44, numéro 1, mars 2013, p. 5-161) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.014

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207