Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si de nombreux pays à travers le monde reconnaissent un droit à l’héritage, les réflexions en philosophie politique contemporaine sur la manière de conceptualiser ce droit et ses fondements moraux restent rares. Quels arguments moraux peuvent justifier le droit des enfants à hériter de la fortune de leurs parents ? Dans cet article, je propose une définition du droit d’hériter et le distingue du droit de léguer. J’explore ensuite comment le droit d’hériter peut être conçu comme une extension du devoir parental de subvenir aux besoins de l’enfant (argument de l’extension). De plus, j’aborde les limites et les critiques de ce droit d’hériter et j’analyse si les lois actuelles s’alignent sur la justification présentée. En conclusion, j’avance qu’un droit modéré à hériter peut s’ancrer dans les devoirs des parents d’assistance matérielle envers leurs enfants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".