De facto, non de jure ou De facto, hoc de jure? Incursions dans la pratique de l’interaction entre le droit étatique et le droit coutumier rom en Roumanie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les Roms sont le seul peuple d’Europe ayant (encore) un droit coutumier vivant. Dans cet article, nous nous proposons d’explorer et d’analyser les hypostases de l’interaction entre le droit coutumier des Roms en Roumanie et le droit étatique roumain. Pour ce faire, dans un premier temps, nous allons brièvement exposer le cadre théorique qui guide notre démarche analytique — le pluralisme normatif. Puis, nous allons présenter les différences fondamentales entre les deux ordres juridiques en relation avec les modes d’organisation sociopolitique respectifs. Enfin, nous esquisserons et explorerons les trois hypostases de l’interaction entre le droit coutumier rom et le droit étatique roumain — la non-coplanarité officielle, l’intersection marginale et la subordination exceptionnelle.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".