Le droit public et l’interface politico-administrative : le contrôle de l’abus de pouvoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article vise à préciser la façon dont le droit public analyse ce que la science politique perçoit comme les rapports d’interface entre le politique et l’administratif. Le droit s’attarde surtout aux pouvoirs, toujours accordés par la loi, et aux processus dans lesquels ils s’inscrivent. Le pouvoir n’est pas le propre de la sphère politique, puisque la sphère administrative dispose aussi de pouvoirs. Les pouvoirs sont discrétionnaires ou liés, selon la marge de manœuvre accordée à son titulaire. Les pouvoirs discrétionnaires de l’appareil public ne doivent jamais être exercés de façon arbitraire, et c’est donc par le concept de l’abus de pouvoir que les tribunaux peuvent exercer un contrôle judiciaire des ingérences illégitimes dans l’exercice d’un pouvoir.
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 | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".