Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walter Benjamin, Carl Schmitt puis Giorgio Agamben ont chacun remis en cause l’idée de norme, dans l’État confronté à la violence, à partir de la notion d’exception. Or l’état d’exception revient à traiter juridiquement d’une matière politique et à occulter le déclencheur, réel ou fantasmé, de l’exception juridique, à savoir la guerre. Une proposition pour comprendre conjointement la difficulté du droit à s’ajuster au surgissement de la violence et l’explosion des formes de guerre répertoriées par l’histoire, consiste à abandonner l’idée de fiction juridique au profit de « fictions politiques ». Ce faisant on substitue à la notion de norme celle, plus descriptive, du phénomène de la violence collective, de « référence » à un type abstrait de guerre pour mesurer les guerres réelles. C’est à cette condition que l’on peut repenser l’exception et son déclencheur, ainsi que l’indétermination première entre guerre extérieure et guerre intérieure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".