Les deux solitudes de l’assurance voyage : cap sur une nouvelle théorie interprétative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors qu’il est souvent affirmé que le contrat d’assurance s’interprète en cherchant l’intention commune des contractants, l’étude de la jurisprudence des 30 dernières années ayant interprété le contrat d’assurance voyage contredit fortement cette affirmation. En effet, la compréhension du contrat d’assurance voyage ressemble davantage à un jeu de souque à la corde où tantôt les intérêts de l’assuré auront préséance au moment de la démarche interprétative, tantôt les intérêts de l’assureur auront le dessus, ne laissant ainsi aucune place à la recherche de l’intention commune, véritable zone interdite (no man’s land) juridique. Le phénomène de la solitude contractuelle offre alors la possibilité d’entrevoir une nouvelle théorie interprétative explicative beaucoup plus adaptée au contrat d’adhésion à large distribution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".