MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791119267 · doi:10.5565/rev/da.187

El bienestar de los animales: un nuevo principio general y constitucional de Derecho comunitario. Sentencia Jippes, TJCE, 2001

2012· article· es· W2791119267 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Brels

Bibliographic record

VenueDerecho Animal Forum of Animal Law Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnimal Law and Welfare
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal (computer security)European unionLawPolitical scienceDirectiveMember statesWelfarePreliminary rulingEuropean communityWelfare economicsEconomic JusticeBusinessEconomicsInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decision "Jippes", returned by the ECJ in 2001, concerned a dispute relating to the FMD epidemic in Europe. To stop the spread of the disease, the European Union (EU) became an EU directive banning the use of vaccinations and imposed mandatory demolition of livestock. The principal applicant, Ms Jippes, owns the farm animals who refuses to kill stating that the EU spent a general principle of law on animal welfare that protected the animals from the physical pain and suffering except in case of need. In this sense, the policy that would prohibit and impose preventive vaccination required the demolition would be in direct conflict with this principle. However, the ECJ rejected this argument stating that the welfare of animals is not a general principle of Community law and concludes at the end of the validity of the measures against FMD

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)0.009
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0120.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDerecho Animal Forum of Animal Law StudiesSame topicAnimal Law and WelfareFrench-language works237,207