Pluralismes juridiques et interculturalités : Regards croisés droit et anthropologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Présentation. Les vies du pluralisme, entre l’anthropologie et le droit, Emmanuelle Piccoli, Geneviève Motard et Christoph Eberhard Pourquoi, en Afrique, «le droit » refuse-t-il toujours le pluralisme que le communautarisme induit ? , Étienne Le Roy Conjugaisons juridiques : des dynamiques du droit en situation migratoire, Dominik Kohlhagen Immigrants et réfugiés au prisme de la vie sociale des droits, Francine Saillant, Joseph J. Lévy et Alfredo Ramirez-Villagra Droit et cultures en sol français : récits de femmes juives et musulmanes à l’aube et au crépuscule du divorce, Pascale Fournier La diversité culturelle en procès : l’expérience de la justice belge par les familles à composante migratoire, quels enjeux pour le pluralisme juridique ?, Caroline Simon et Barbara Truffin Quand la coutume fait Loi. Du terrain anthropologique inuit au rôle de témoin-expert devant les instances juridiques, Bernard Saladin d’Anglure Sur la frontière : les Salish du littoral et l’érosion de la souveraineté, Bruce Granville Miller Pluralisme juridique et contemporanéité des droits et des responsabilités territoriales chez les Atikamekw Nehirowisiwok, Benoit Éthier ENTREVUE, Prendre le droit autochtone au sérieux , Entretien avec Hadley Friedland, Geneviève Motard et Mathieu-Joffre Lainé
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".