MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585910341 · doi:10.4000/ethiquepublique.2820

Désacraliser le titulaire de la fonction politique, pour réhabiliter le censeur. Le cas français

2016· article· fr· W2585910341 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olivier Pluen

Bibliographic record

VenueÉthique Publique · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En dépit de sept lois intervenues entre 1988 et 2013 en matière de transparence dans la vie publique et de lutte contre la corruption, la France est caractérisée par un sentiment de banalisation des scandales politiques. Ces derniers, qui conduisent parfois à la démission ou à la condamnation d’un responsable politique, semblent d’abord revêtir une dimension « sacrificielle ». Or cette situation, qui aboutit à ne plus voir dans certains manquements éthiques des scandales politiques ou qui prive ceux-ci, lorsqu’ils éclatent, de leur effet utile pour la construction de l’État de droit, est révélatrice d’une culture juridique française fondée sur une croyance en une « incarnation » du pouvoir. L’objet de l’article est dès lors d’expliquer les raisons de cette spécificité, avant de montrer que le système français promeut lui-même une distinction entre la fonction politique et son titulaire, et l’instauration d’un « censeur » au service de la première.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉthique PubliqueSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207