Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The national welfare state, so it seems, has come under attack by European integration. This article focuses on one facet of the welfare state, that is, healthcare and on one specific dimension, that is, cross-border movement of patients. The institution which has played a pivotal role in the development of the framework regulating the migration of patients is the European Court of Justice ( ecj ). The Court’s activity in this sensitive area has not remained without critics. This was even more so since the Court invoked Treaty (primary) law which not only has made it difficult to overturn case law but also has left the legislator with very little room for manoeuvre in relation to any future (secondary) eu law. What is therefore of special interest in terms of legitimacy is the legal reasoning by which the Court has made its contribution to the development of this framework. This article is a re-appraisal of the legal development in this field.
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 | 0.075 | 0.102 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".