MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946455362 · doi:10.7202/1067273ar

La différenciation : solution miracle pour l’Union européenne ?

2020· article· fr· W2946455362 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anne-Marie Tournepiche

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Face aux multiples crises que connaît l’Union européenne depuis quelques années, une des pistes les plus souvent évoquées pour permettre à la construction européenne de continuer à avancer est d’aller vers une Europe différenciée, en permettant aux Etats membres de choisir des rythmes d’intégration différents. Si la différenciation n’est pas une nouveauté dans la construction européenne, ce qui est inédit c’est qu’elle n’est plus envisagée comme une solution de dernier recours, mais comme un choix assumé. Si cette option d’une Union européenne différenciée comporte des avantages certains, elle n’est pas pour autant dénuée de risques, tant sur le plan politique que juridique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.244 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de droit internationalSame topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207