MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122280131 · doi:10.7202/1027084ar

L’application des traités internationaux et des règles dérivées dans les pays de droit civil et de common law

2014· article· fr· W2122280131 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Claude Emanuelli

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Studies and Legal History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’idée voulant que les pays de tradition romano-germanique soient monistes, alors que les pays anglo-saxons sont dualistes est remise en cause dans la présente étude. Celle-ci envisage l’application des traités internationaux et des actes communautaires dans l’ordre juridique d’États appartenant à chacune des deux grandes familles du droit. Elle constate que des facteurs particuliers influencent les solutions retenues par chaque État. Cela dit, les juges nationaux hésitent à appliquer sans réserve le droit international, même dans un cadre communautaire. Toutefois, les solutions adoptées ne sont pas simplement systémiques. Ainsi, certains États de tradition romano-germanique ne donnent pas une application directe aux traités internationaux.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicClassical Studies and Legal HistoryFrench-language works237,207