LE DROIT COMPARÉ COMME INSTRUMENT DE MODERNISATION : L’EXEMPLE DES CODIFICATIONS CIVILES DES ÉTATS ARABES DU MOYEN-ORIENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au lendemain de la décolonisation, les nouveaux États arabes du Moyen- Orient entreprirent un vaste mouvement de codification du droit civil. Dans cette région du monde, la codification va bien au-delà d’une simple technique de compilation et de systématisation des normes. Elle revêt une fonction particulière, celle de modernisation et, subrepticement, de sécularisation du droit. Elle conduit à établir un corpus juris largement détaché de la Charia. Le droit comparé a été mis au coeur de cette entreprise afin de concilier aspiration légitime à la modernité et respect des traditions. Ainsi, si la contribution du droit comparé au processus de production législative paraît capitale, son apport en tant que source d’inspiration peut varier d’un pays à l’autre en fonction de la place réservée au droit traditionnel, le droit musulman. Le présent article propose d’évaluer le rôle du droit comparé dans l’évolution du droit civil des pays arabes à travers le processus de codification.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".