Bibliographic record
Abstract
À l’heure du bicentenaire du Code civil français, l’étude de l’article 1147 présente un intérêt particulier. Elle laisse apercevoir que le passage du temps n’a pas, comme dans certains cas, conduit à son vieillissement, mais au contraire à l’enrichissement du sens et de la portée de ce texte. Son application inspirée par la conciliation des exigences juridiques et la satisfaction des besoins de la pratique contractuelle est très innovatrice et très riche d’enseignements. Car l’article 1147 s’impose comme fondement de plusieurs nouvelles classifications des obligations contractuelles. Il a permis de combler les lacunes juridiques relatives à l’étendue des obligations contractuelles et à la mise en œuvre de la responsabilité du débiteur défaillant. De nature expansionniste, cette application de l’article 1147 risque malheureusement d’affaiblir la portée des autres dispositions du Code civil applicables au contrat ou de fragiliser leur cohérence.
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".