MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979393835 · doi:10.7202/1028062ar

L’influence de la common law dans la pratique du droit, en France et dans l’Union européenne

2015· article· fr· W1979393835 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Gordon-Krief

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur présente comment le droit des affaires mondialisées se pratique en France. Dans ce pays, les affaires traitées dans le sans-frontières, au-delà de la stabilité et de la rigueur des principes généraux et abstraits de droit civil, dépaysent et décontenancent le juriste français, étranger aux cas particuliers que ne cesse de faire naître la mondialisation : il s’en remet aussi à la common law. En France, les transactions de l’ère mondialisée se traitent donc sous la direction d’avocats de common law, de Grande-Bretagne ou des États-Unis à l’aide des techniques de ce système de droit, maître du cas particulier.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.021
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicComparative and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207