Les Quinze à la croisée des chemins. Sur les formes possibles de l'Union européenne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The European Union (EU) does not typify any of the political union models that were proposed for the basis of Us formulation. Quite to the contrary, the Maastricht Treaty interweaves components of these prototypes, with the end result being rather disconcerting at a conceptual level. The Treaty does stipulate, however, that an Intergovernmental Conference take place in 1996-97; an important item on the agenda mil be defining the political union model that will set the stage for further European integration. This paper identifies and analyses the alternative political union models available to EU members, and attempts to discern which of them will, in most likelihood, be selected by the Conference. They are grouped into jour categories: status quo, federation, renationalisation and confederation. These models, each in their unique style, address such issues as alleviating the democratic deficit (explored further in paper) and buttressing the legitimacy of Brussells' institutions. The paper suggests that the Conference will ultimately choose between the status quo and confederation options ; but, faced with the difficulty of predicting which of these choices will win favour - especially given the debate unfolding on eastern EU expansion - it does not attempt to pinpoint the outcome of the Conference. It does conclude, however, that the renationalisation and federation options are not realistic in light of their weak foothold in Europeans' political culture.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".