Le droit international peut-il être un droit de résistance ? Dix conditions pour un renouveau de l’ambition normative internationale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le droit international (di) se présente comme un droit de consolidation de la souveraineté et de sa limitation par la communauté internationale. Demeurent exclus de ce face à face les efforts engagés par la « société civile », les individus ou les mouvements sociaux, qui concourent pourtant à renforcer les objectifs du di. Le projet normatif incarné par le di pourrait bénéficier d’une plus grande reconnaissance de la part significative qu’ont joué et pourraient encore jouer les acteurs non-étatiques dans son établissement. Il y aurait là une convergence entre l’aspiration substantive croissante du di à être un droit de l’humain, et le développement de modalités de mise en oeuvre du di renouvelées qui prendraient pour assise la figure centrale de la résistance. Pour que prenne forme cette utopie, on se propose d’identifier dix conditions préalables à son avènement.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".