MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W228759561

TJUE – Tribunal General – Auto de 6.9.2011, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami y otros c. Parlamento y Consejo , T-18/10; Sentencia de 25.10.2011, Microban c. Comisión , T-262/10 – > – Por fin una definición judicial de los «actos reglamentarios» del artículo 263, 4 TFUE

2013· article· es· W228759561 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueRevista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo · 2013
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Immigration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalHumanitiesPolitical scienceLawArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El articulo 263.4 TFUE introduce una nueva regla de legitimacion para los particulares relativa a los actos reglamentarios que no conlleven medidas de ejecucion. La nocion de estos ultimos suscitaba dudas hasta que el Tribunal General los ha definido en los asuntos Inuit y Microban como actos generales no legislativos, concepto que se entiende desde un punto de vista formal. La definicion judicial aclara conceptos juridicos basicos en el estudio de las fuentes del Derecho derivado de la Union Europea y fija los nuevos limites de la legitimacion de los particulares ante los tribunales de la Union, aunque no supone una mejora general del derecho de acceso a la justicia para los ciudadanos.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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