Les frontières de l’ordre contractuel : les traçages économiques et juridiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce que les juristes appellent un « contrat » est un « échange » pour les économistes : ces deux systèmes entrent en interaction pour nommer ce phénomène, l’expliquer et le réguler. L’ordre contractuel est déterminé, circonscrit par l’un et l’autre des systèmes et ses frontières sont tracées par les relations qu’ils entretiennent. Qu’elles s’établissent sur des connivences, des antagonismes ou des stratégies de domination, ces interactions balisent les interventions du juge dans les contrats. L’auteure en propose trois modèles qui, bien qu’ils tendent à s’exclure en apparence, peuvent coexister dans le temps et dans l’espace. Leur comparaison permet de déployer l’éventail des possibilités qui s’offrent aux acteurs judiciaires sans préjuger pour autant de leur attitude réelle.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".