MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980987681 · doi:10.24908/fede.v18i1.13576

L’inclusion du droit à la sécession dans la constitution

2017· article· fr· W2980987681 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alex Miller-Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueFederalism-E · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question de la sécession est une question qui touche beaucoup d’États, mais en particulier les pays qui sont composés d’États fédérés ou qui connaissent une certaine forme de dévolution envers des régions spécifiques de leur territoire. Dans les Constitutions des États fédéraux, plusieurs dispositions sont prévues, notamment les compétences respectives des paliers de pouvoir ainsi que les compétences résiduaires. Les dispositions concernant le droit à la sécession sont très rarement incluses dans les Constitutions fédérales. En ce moment, seules les Constitutions des fédérations de l’Éthiopie et de Saint-Kitts-et-Nevis mentionnent explicitement un droit à la sécession (Kreptul, 2003, p. 79). Il apparaît peut-être contraire à l’idée même de la fédération que de prévoir comment se séparer alors que les membres sont en train de s’unir [...]

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
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 studies0.0130.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederalism-ESame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207