MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972719401 · doi:10.7202/037570ar

Carl Schmitt face à Hans Kelsen

2009· article· fr· W1972719401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frédéric Ramel

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theology and Sovereignty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La construction d’une pensée repose bien souvent sur la mise en relief de distinctions afin de clarifier son propre chemin. La réflexion menée par Schmitt est une réponse critique au normativisme de Kelsen, y compris en matière de relations internationales. L’opposition entre les deux juristes porte sur l’organisation de la sécurité collective et sur la conception du droit international (dépasser la primitivité du droit actuel pour Kelsen, renouer avec le droit public européen pour Schmitt), mais aussi sur la nature des relations internationales : élargissement à d’autres acteurs que les États et appels à l’ universum pour Kelsen ; concentration sur les acteurs étatiques et irréductibilité du pluriversum pour Schmitt.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.299 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicPolitical Theology and SovereigntyFrench-language works237,207