MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2171069064 · doi:10.7202/042243ar

Les principes généraux du droit français de la fonction publique

2005· article· en· W2171069064 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gérard Timsit

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil servantsStatutory lawPublic servicePoliticsCivil libertiesPromotion (chess)Political sciencePublic lawPublic administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In France, public service rests upon the fundamental rule of the specialization of the law applicable to public servants. This entails that public servants are given a special status that singles them out from others in the other economic or social sectors. That special legal status of the French public service is however being diminished under the influence of external factors. Economic factors tend to subject public servants to the general law of labour contracts. Political factors tend to give public servants the complete enjoyment of fundamental rights and civil liberties. Finally, administrative factors such as policies favouring mobility and promotion tend to lessen the importance of rigid classification and grading. On the eve of major statutory changes in the law of the public service in Québec, Professor Timsit’s study provides an interesting comparative viewpoint.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.377
Teacher spread0.348 · 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
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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