MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239346953 · doi:10.1177/201395251100200202

Collective Action in Labour Conflicts under the Rome II Regulation (Part II)

2011· article· en· W4239346953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Filip Dorssemont, Aukje van Hoek

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Labour Law Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUndoAction (physics)Interpretation (philosophy)Relation (database)PhenomenonLabour lawLaw and economicsLawCollective actionFocus (optics)Industrial actionConflict of lawsPolitical scienceSociologyEpistemologyComputer sciencePhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this second part of our two-part contribution, we focus on the content of the choice of law rule of Article 9 and its relation to the other provisions of the Regulation. The application of the rule to some (in)famous cases – Tor Caledonia, Viking, Laval – demonstrates the difficulty in applying concepts developed to regulate individual behaviour in private law cases to the phenomenon of industrial action. The special rule of Article 9 seems to offer some protection to workers, but much will depend on its interpretation by the courts. In any case, the rule can not undo the effect of the Viking and Laval judgments which directly affect the right to strike as such.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.221 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Labour Law JournalSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207