MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2136691184 · doi:10.7202/043925ar

La répartition constitutionnelle des compétences entre la loi et les accords collectifs de travail en droit français

2005· article· fr· W2136691184 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bertrand Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’articulation entre la loi et les accords collectifs de travail repose en droit français sur le principe constitutionnel de participation. L’évolution du système normatif est caractérisée par un développement de la part du contrat. Au système traditionnel de mise en œuvre de la loi par les accords collectifs, s’ajoutent un renforcement des exigences liées au respect des conventions par le législateur et une plus grande liberté des partenaires sociaux quant à la détermination de la substance des accords. Enfin, une réforme législative est engagée pour renforcer le rôle des partenaires sociaux dans l’élaboration des lois relatives au droit du travail.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.017
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droit→Same topicHealthcare Systems and Practices→French-language works237,207→