MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090585014 · doi:10.7202/039334ar

Dérives et évolution du principe de la légalité en droit pénal français : contribution à l’étude des sources du droit pénal français

2010· article· fr· W2090585014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bertrand de Lamy

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le principe de la légalité criminelle connaît une évolution importante en droit pénal français. La diversification des sources du droit remet en cause la conception classique qui conférait à la loi, au sens formel, le monopole de la répression. L’apparition et l’extraordinaire développement du droit international, et en particulier du droit européen, ressurgissent sur le droit pénal. Non seulement la loi pénale subit la concurrence d’autres normes, mais encore elle est devenue un objet de contrôle de la part des juges internes et de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme. Cette dernière fait glisser la France vers une conception matérielle de la légalité en ne s’intéressant pas à la légitimité de celui qui édicte la norme, mais à la seule qualité rédactionnelle de cette dernière. Cette évolution amène à s’interroger, notamment, à propos de l’incidence de ce désordre normatif sur la cohérence des mouvements de pénalisation et la légitimité du droit de punir.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207