Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte dresse un tableau de l'enseignement du droit en Chine après quinze ans de développement accéléré. Il décrit les trois niveaux deformation offerts dans les établissements d'enseignement supérieur (formation spécialisée, formation universitaire, études avancées), et expose le contenu des programmes de sciences juridiques. Il signale également le développement notable de la formation juridique parascolaire, sous ses diverses formes. Les auteurs exposent ensuite les conditions générales dans lesquelles va se poursuivre le développement de l'enseignement du droit, et notamment celles qui découlent des réformes économiques. Ils précisent les orientations prévisibles de l'enseignement vers la formation de juristes polyvalents d'un haut niveau de compétence. Ils décrivent les programmes pilotes et les nouveaux programmes d'études avancées mis en place dans divers établissements, ainsi que le développement de programmes interdisciplinaires combinant droit et économie, droit et technologie, ou droit et gestion du commerce international.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".