Le Pacs, valeur de référence pour les pays asiatiques aux niveaux juridique et moral
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis son entree en vigueur le 15 novembre 1999, le Pacte Civil de Solidarite (Pacs) voit apparaitre sans arret de nombreux debats et de divers impacts aussi bien sur une nouvelle construction morale de la societe, sur la remise en cause le mariage traditionnel que sur les droits revendiques par les couples de meme sexe, consideres depuis longtemps comme marginaux. La famille est la plus petite unite de la societe dont la stabilite et le developpement harmonieux sont indissociables de sa construction et de son evolution. En tant que reglement complementairet du Code Civil, le Pacs est une loi speciale mise en œuvre par le gouvernement francais pour resoudre une serie des difficultes de gouvernance sociale en offrant une protection juridique, qui non seulement aux couples heterosexuels, mais egalement aux couples homosexuels. Nous commencerons par le contexte social de la loi, en explorant une variete de pensees emancipatrices qui ont favorise la montee du feminisme et l'impact de la transformation des roles homme-femme. Cet article montrera egalement l’influence negative et positive de la cohabitation de la diversite des formes entre couple. En outre, la valeur de reference que ce systeme peut fournir aux pays asiatiques d’aujourd’hui merite egalement notre attention.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".