Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Faut-il des droits spécifiques aux personnes âgées ou le recours à la loi commune est-il suffisant ? Est-il imaginable d’envisager des droits spécifiques selon une segmentation par âges, ou s’agit-il tout simplement « d’assurer la protection des plus faibles quelle que soit l’origine de cette faiblesse » ? Enfin, les droits fondamentaux sont-ils bien respectés lorsque survient la nécessité de prises en charge dans un cadre institutionnel ou dans l’intimité du domicile ? Ces interrogations s’inscrivent dans un climat de judiciarisation, de recherche de responsabilité lorsque des aléas résultant d’une prise de risque mal appréciée surviennent – climat propice à mettre en balance sécurité et respect des libertés. La question des droits et du vieillissement n’est-elle pas tout simplement celle de l’exercice de la citoyenneté, en particulier au moment où l’état de dépendance peut accroître la vulnérabilité ?
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".