La ‘tecnica del bilanciamento’ alla prova della “sua giustizia”
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il saggio sottolinea alcune criticità della tecnica giudiziale del bilanciamento, rappresentata dalla scienza giuridica dominante come ‘formula magica’ capace di individuare sempre la soluzione più giusta, più equilibrata, più mite del caso concreto sottoposto al giudice. In verità nella sua declinazione comunitaria, nella forma del giudizio di proporzionalità, questa tecnica finisce per risultare ‘sbilanciata’ in favore dei valori della Costituzione economica comunitaria e dunque delle libertà economiche fondamentali a detrimento dei diritti sociali codificati nelle Costituzioni nazionali (come è reso evidente dai celebri casi giurisprudenziali Viking e Laval).
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.011 |
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 it