Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. L'auteur entend défendre dans cet essai une conception de la sécession qu'il appelle délibérative et la justifier par rapport à d'autres théories concurrentes de la sécession. En l'absence d'un encadrement juridique clair et rigoureux des cas de sécession, de plus en plus nombreux, qui échappent aux situations de domination coloniale prévues par le droit international, la question se pose en effet de savoir s'il n'existe pas d'autres moyens de les résoudre dans des conditions pacifiques. L'auteur soutient que la démocratie délibérative pourrait offrir de tels moyens. Le but de l'article est d'examiner dans quelles conditions et à l'intérieur de quelles limites. Abstract. In this article, the author aims at supporting a deliberative conception of secession and at justifying it against other rival theories. In the absence of clear and rigorous legal regulations of more and more numerous cases of secession going beyond the situations of colonial domination already covered by the international law, the question arises as to whether other means for their pacific solution are available. The author contends that deliberative democracy could provide such a means and examines in what conditions and within what limits this could be achieved.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".