LA GARANTIE DES DROITS FONDAMENTAUX EN EUROPE : POUR LE RESPECT DES COMPÉTENCES CONCURRENTES DE LUXEMBOURG ET DE STRASBOURG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’adoption, par l’Union européenne, d’une Charte des droits fondamentaux, renforcera la tendance de la Cour de Luxembourg à trancher des questions relatives à ces droits. Pour certains, cette compétence se traduira en une concurrence contre-productive entre cette Cour et celle de Strasbourg. L’auteur adopte, au contraire, une position pluraliste et prétend que la coexistence de deux ordres juridiques compétents en matière de droits fondamentaux est de nature à en assurer une meilleure effectivité. Il fait d’abord état des grandes lignes de fondements de ces deux ordres juridiques et de leur évolution jurisprudentielle en ce qui a trait aux droits de la personne et termine en abordant les droits garantis par l’ordre communautaire et par la Convention européenne ainsi que la garantie de ces droits assurée par les juridictions de Strasbourg et de Luxembourg.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".