MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317501541 · doi:10.3917/lpe.009.0043

La dignité de la créature au miroir de l’animal. Droit fondamental ou principe général ?

2023· article· fr· W4317501541 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Favre

Bibliographic record

VenueLa Pensée écologique · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La dignité de la créature est un concept juridique flou, mais non pas vide. Elle fixe un programme ambitieux : le respect du vivant par une communauté humaine et une responsabilité à son égard. Malgré ses 30 ans, cette innovation du droit helvétique est encore en quête d’une concrétisation juridique. Afin d’envisager plus précisément les formes que cette dignité du vivant pourrait prendre à l’avenir, il est utile de lui tendre un miroir grossissant : celui de l’animal. C’est en effet sous la guise de la dignité animale que se laissent aujourd’hui le mieux percevoir les deux voies possibles de la concrétisation de ce concept innovant (droit subjectif ou principe). L’alternative mérite qu’on s’y arrête, car elle trace sans doute les contours de la société multispécifique de demain.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLa Pensée écologiqueSame topicGeographies of human-animal interactionsFrench-language works237,207