Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quelles seront l’importance du droit et la place des juristes dans la société du XXIe siècle ? Se référant aux thèses défendues respectivement par Tim Murphy, Yves Dezalay et Gunther Teubner, l’auteur esquisse trois scénarios d’avenir : 1° le droit perdra la place centrale qu’il a occupée dans l’imaginaire social depuis les débuts de la modernité; 2° la communauté des juristes sera de plus en plus inféodée à la logique économiste du milieu des affaires; 3° la régulation juridique de la société et le rapport du droit avec les autres discours spécialisés seront de type procédural plutôt que substantif. Considérés globalement, ces trois scénarios imposent, selon l’auteur, trois défis que les juristes, et en particulier les professeurs de droit, devront relever : la connaissance lucide de la culture juridique, la vigilance critique à l’égard des usages sociaux du droit et la sophistication épistémologique de la science 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 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 | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| 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".