MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993878983 · doi:10.7202/027152ar

Avortement, éthique sociale et positivisme juridique

2007· article· fr· W1993878983 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
François Blais

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article a pour objectif de défendre un point de vue positiviste du droit de certaines erreurs et confusions commises à son égard. L'auteur se sert d'un récent article de G. Legault (« La parole du philosophe éthicien est-elle crédible? ») et reprend certaines affirmations identifiant le mouvement pro-choix à la doctrine positiviste. L'auteur tente de démontrer que ce rapprochement, pour l'essentiel, ne tient pas et qu'il repose sur une méconnaissance du positivisme juridique contemporain. En dernière partie, l'auteur discute de certains intérêts théoriques et pratiques d'une conception plus large du concept de droit telle que privilégiée par le positivisme juridique.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicLegal and Social PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207