Le monde virtuel met au défi les législateurs : la problématique de la loi applicable dans le cyberespace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La designation du droit applicable se trouve souvent confrontee a la realite de l’existence d’Etats Nations avec leurs legislations diverses et parfois contradictoires. A cette realite vient s’ajouter, la difficulte de l’applicabilite de celles-ci a un environnement virtuel. Faut-il des lors s’atteler a les readapter, ou tout au moins, a les interpreter, en proposant une lecture plus conforme a des operations se revelant etre essentiellement immaterielles ? Une reponse plus tranchee conduirait a la creation de veritables regles materielles uniformes, a l’instar du legislateur europeen, meme si ce dernier ne s’est pas exprime clairement sur l’influence de ces regles materielles sur les regles de droit international prive traditionnelles. En effet, le legislateur europeen au travers de la directive sur le commerce electronique a cree un veritable imbroglio juridique, meme si, en definitive, celui-ci s’averera plus theorique que pratique. Enfin, comment peut-on concilier la defense du consommateur en lui garantissant un standard minimum de protection sans augmenter le risque juridique pour l’entreprise ? Pour repondre a cette question, le concept d’activite dirigee parait etre, au jour d’aujourd’hui, la solution la plus adaptee et est, par ailleurs, celle qui fut retenue en premiere lecture de la proposition de Reglement europeen sur la loi applicable aux obligations contractuelles en date du 29 novembre 2007.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".