MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7007792416

Alguns problemas sobre a tutela dos direitos fundamentais na jurisprudência do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia: os casos Viking e Laval

2020· article· pt· W7007792416 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Repository of Open Access of Portugal (RCAAP) · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal and Labor Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalHuman rightsEuropean unionWork (physics)Fundamental rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Na jurisprudência do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia em matéria laboral destacam-se as decisões proferidas nos casos Viking e Laval. Mais de uma década depois, as ondas-de-choque geradas por estes arestos continuam a fazer-se sentir, condicionando o presente e o futuro do direito do trabalho da União. Este estudo busca reflectir criticamente sobre essa linha jurisprudencial, a qual, entre outras coisas, constitui um barómetro privilegiado de uma das maiores tensões constitucionais da União Europeia, no choque entre liberdades económicas decorrentes do Tratado e os direitos consagrados na Carta dos Direitos Fundamentais da União Europeia e nas Constituições nacionais.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.265 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Repository of Open Access of Portugal (RCAAP)Same topicLegal and Labor StudiesFrench-language works237,207