MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389333528 · doi:10.7202/1105855ar

LES ORIGINES ET LES FONDEMENTS DU RECOURS AU CONSENSUS EN DROIT EUROPÉEN DES DROITS DE L’HOMME

2013· article· fr· W4389333528 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Frédérick Doucet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de droit Université de Sherbrooke · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La notion de consensus joue un rôle primordial dans la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme, notamment dans le cadre de l'interprétation de la Convention européenne des droits de l'Homme et de l'exercice du contrôle européen. Or, à une époque où le recours au droit international et au droit comparé se veut de plus en plus fréquent afin d'apporter des solutions aux cas difficiles, l'interprétation consensuelle telle qu'existant en droit européen des droits de l'Homme pourrait servir de guide aux instances nationales canadiennes et québécoises. À cette fin, il convient de se demander en quoi consiste cette technique d'herméneutique et d'où celle-ci tire ses origines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de droit Université de SherbrookeSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207