Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'anthropologie et la modernité du droit Qu'en est-il de la contribution de l'anthropologie à la connaissance du droit ? Évoquant les principales avenues par lesquelles la discipline a envisagé cet incommode objet, à la fois système d'analyse et principe de gouvernement, cet article suggère l'adoption d'une perspective critique capable de questionner utilement la porosité existant entre les modes anthropologiques de rendre compte de la juridicité et les emplois juridiques de l'information ethnologique. Aussi est-il proposé d'envisager le " champ juridique " comme un événement culturel, marqué par l'histoire et relatif aux sociétés qui ont assumé sa genèse. Une critique conceptuelle de la catégorie juridique figure ainsi la condition préalable permettant aux faits observés par l'anthropologie de prendre place dans un processus de connaissance affranchi des exigences pratiques du savoir juridique institué.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".