Sieyès et le jury constitutionnaire : perspectives historico-juridiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marco Fioravanti, Sieyès and the constitutional jury : historical I judicial perspectives. This article studies the origin of the control of the constitutionality of laws in France, particularly the project Sieyès presented to the National Convention on the 2 and 18 thermidor an III (20 July and 5 August 1795) which culminated in the idea of a constituent power and separation of powers. The authors tries to demonstrate that in the French tradition characterized by the refusal to use instruments to guarantee the integrity of the constitution and to limit the powers of the legislator, the project of Sieyès is an attempt to create a neutral power by the constitutional jury, a politico-judicial organ, responsible for controlling the constitutionality of laws, for proposing the change in the constitution, and for the exercise of an natural equality.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".