Une approche des relations de travail en Afrique en termes de mobilisations du droit. L’exemple du contrat de travail au Togo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans un contexte où l’on parlerait volontiers de « non-droit » ou de « droit invalide », les modes d’intervention juridique dans les relations de travail ainsi que leurs formalisations apparaissent sous-tendus au Togo par des réalités aussi diverses que paradoxales. Au travers du prisme particulier de l’analyse des mobilisations du droit du travail, il est proposé de voir comment la catégorie juridique du contrat de travail est traitée en pratique. Le cadre théorique des mobilisations du droit permet, sur un plan épistémologique d’une part, d’élargir le champ d’étude juridique du droit officiel africain et, sur un plan analytique d’autre part, de proposer une manière d’aborder le lien entre les mécanismes de production, les justifications du droit et la complexité de ses effets dans la régulation des relations de travail au Togo.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".