Bibliographic record
Abstract
La Conférence Rio+20 a rappelé la nécessité de ne pas revenir sur les engagements pris à l’occasion de Rio 1992. La notion de « non-régression » a ainsi pénétré le droit international, grâce à un amendement présenté par le Groupe des 77 lors des négociations de New York (mai 2012). C’est aussi le dynamisme du professeur Prieur et de nombreux juristes de l’environnement qui a rendu possible ce garde-fou. Si la formulation de cet amendement est encore prudente et ne peut qualifier un nouveau principe du droit de l’environnement, elle constitue une garantie des acquis juridiques de Rio 1992, à partir desquels de très nombreux pays ont ou vont constitutionnaliser le droit de l’environnement. Il reste cependant, comme nous le rappelle l’auteur, à consacrer le principe de non-régression, car le contournement – sur le principe de précaution, par exemple – reste encore, trop souvent, la « règle ».
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 | 0.009 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.005 |
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".