MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038857906 · doi:10.7202/1014284ar

L’enseignement du droit et les nouvelles technologies : sommes-nous prêts pour un enseignement-apprentissage en réseau ? Le cas d’un projet pilote d’enseignement de la légistique

2013· article· fr· W2038857906 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

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal Systems and Institutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les modes de formation et de circulation des modèles juridiques, et la circulation de ces modes eux-mêmes à l’ère technologique, impliquent une nouvelle approche de l’enseignement et de l’apprentissage du droit. Dans ce nouveau cadre, qui n’est déjà plus de l’ordre de l’imaginaire, réfléchir, enseigner et transmettre des compétences relatives à la conception et à l’élaboration d’actes normatifs n’est pas une tâche facile pour les facultés de droit. C’est ce qui a amené l’auteure à tenter cette expérience qu’a été et que reste le réseau legistica.ning comme milieu d’enseignement et d’apprentissage dans le contexte du cours de légistique donné à la Faculté de droit de l’Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG).

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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