MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035814439 · doi:10.5539/res.v6n4p249

Archetypical Component of the Law as a Basis to Differentiate Between the Western and the Eastern Legal Tradition

2014· article· en· W2035814439 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchetypeUnconscious mindValue (mathematics)Basis (linear algebra)PhenomenonLawLegal cultureSociologyCollective unconsciousEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologyPolitical sciencePsychoanalysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the article the author explores the issue of the genesis of the law as a phenomenon of objective reality differentiating it according to the principle of belonging to the western and the eastern legal tradition. The methodology basis for this research is the analytical psychology conception of Carl Gustav Jung, who considered the collective unconscious to be the basis of the human culture, which has collective, universal and impersonal nature, identical for all individuals of a certain community. We suggest differentiating the western and the eastern legal traditions in accordance with the values of the archetype criterion, which is the dominating cultural idea, and which creates the basic influence on the legal regulation on the whole and, in particular, determines the role of the law in public life and estimation of the law as a value.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it