Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'appel à contribution pour le numéro 5 des Cahiers Jean Moulin sollicite des articles portant sur les relations entre quotidien et droit. Longtemps rejeté hors du champ d'investigation scientifique, le quotidien est devenu depuis quelques décennies un objet à part entière des études philosophiques et de sciences humaines. Il soulève en particulier pour le droit des enjeux importants, qui concernent l'inscription du phénomène juridique dans la société, qu'il s'agisse d'interroger la définition et la portée de la règle de droit ou le projet juridique de la modernité tendant à déterminer la vie quotidienne des individus par la loi. Les articles pourront procéder d’une analyse du droit positif comme de l’histoire du droit, à partir d’un point de vue juridique, sociologique ou de science politique. Ils pourront porter sur des études de cas, mais aussi concerner des approches plus théoriques sur le lien que le quotidien entretient avec le droit.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.008 |
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".