L’influence de la jurisprudence européenne sur le système africain de protection des droits de l’homme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article vise à analyser le rayonnement de la jurisprudence européenne de l’autre côté de la méditerranée. En effet, le système africain de protection des droits de l’homme présente aujourd’hui un degré de maturation rendant légitime toute étude visant à le confronter aux autres systèmes régionaux de protection des droits de l’homme, notamment le plus vieux d’entre eux. A cet égard, force est de reconnaitre que les solutions dégagées par le juge de Strasbourg servent assez souvent de repère aux juges africains dans leur oeuvre interprétative. Cet article vise donc à analyser la nature ainsi que la profondeur de l’influence européenne dans le système africain de protection des droits de l’homme, notamment à travers la jurisprudence de la Cour et de la Commission africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".