MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154352624 · doi:10.7202/043005ar

La participation du Parlement européen au contentieux communautaire: indice de sa position institutionnelle

2005· article· fr· W2154352624 on OpenAlex
M. Michaud

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Immigration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Parliament
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Parlement européen, institution des Communautés européennes encore peu connue du grand public il y a seulement une décennie, bénéficie aujourd'hui d'un impact certain auprès des 270 millions d'européens qui y sont représentés et même d'une autorité non négligeable auprès de la communauté internationale. Cette notoriété nouvelle est le résultat d'une évolution tranquille de traités commerciaux internationaux, certes plus élaborés que d'ordinaire, tendant aujourd'hui vers une unification « constitutionnelle » de l'Europe des douze États qui la composent. C'est un des aspects de cette évolution que tente de mettre en lumièrre cette étude en droit « constitutionnel » communautaire axée sur la reconnaissance du droit d'ester en justice du Parlement européen. Cette reconnaissance est le moyen pour ce dernier d'accéder à une position institutionnelle plus favorable.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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