Introduction to the IALS Conference on Comparative Constitutional Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thirteen essays here contributed speak to the potential benefits of transplant and the phenomenon of transformation, as well as the prospects of convergence, in distinct and diverse voices. The legal systems considered include those of Canada, France, India, Italy, Malaysia, South Africa, Turkey and the United States. They range across common and civil law systems and along a broad spectrum of developed and emerging market economies. In the illustration of transplants and their ramifications, the authors address areas of scholarly legal inquiry such as judicial review, constitutionalism, human rights, intersectionality, and legal education. The authors probe historical and contemporary developments to address current challenges that include: (i) providing water in South Africa to sustain human dignity in an impoverished community, (ii) the implications of allowing or prohibiting the wearing of a veil in the context of public education in France and Turkey (and more broadly relative to Canada, the interfaces of women's rights, the observance of cultural and religious traditions, and family law), (iii) the establishment of judicial review in a post-conflict environment (drawing on Italy's post World War II experience), (iv) the transformation of European civil law systems, as well as that of the European Union itself, by virtue of their exposure to the European Union's common law jurisdictions (notably the law of England and Wales), (v) the revolution in English law associated with the injection of European Community and European human rights components into it, (vi) the role of constitutional anchors in India for state intervention to lift significant portions of society from poverty, and (vii) attention to foreign constitutional models in the systems of legal education in Malaysia and South Africa as well as in South Africa's vibrant constitutional jurisprudence.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.011 |
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".