Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce bref essai voudrait inviter à prendre en considération le phénomène d’écriture juridique, c’est-à-dire le mode privilégié de formalisation du droit dans les sociétés occidentales contemporaines. Pour cela, il développe une idée simple à première vue : puisque le droit se présente à nous dans des textes, la composition de ces textes conditionne la manière d’être du droit. Or l’écriture du droit, quel que soit l’auteur du texte, quel que soit le type du texte, connaît certaines contraintes qui influent, par conséquent, sur le droit lui-même. Il apparaît donc que l’écriture juridique est un acte constitutif du droit. Plus encore, il s’agit d’un acte constitutif de certaines des équivoques, de certaines des ambivalences, bref, des flottements caractéristiques du droit. En établissant ainsi l’enjeu de la textualisation du droit, cet article plaide pour faire de l’écriture juridique un objet d’étude.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".