La contribution du tribunal pénal international pour l'ex-Yougoslavie au développement des sources du droit international public : le dilemme normatif entre droit international classique et droit international pénal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce mémoire traite de la contribution du Tribunal pénal international\npour l'ex-Yougoslavie (« TPIY ») au développement des sources formelles du\ndroit international public. Il considère, plus précisément, le dilemme normatif\nentre le droit international classique, polarisé sur l'État et « résorbé» dans une\njuridicité formelle, et le «droit de l'unité substantiel », codifiant le mythe\nkantien de la paix par le droit et associant juridicité et légitimité par une\nintégration de l'éthique dans le droit. L'analyse postule la rétroaction du droit\nsur ses sources et étudie les courants idéologiques du droit international\ncontemporain à partir de la jurisprudence du TPIY. Le mémoire conclut à une\nrupture entre le discours rhétorique du TPIY sur les sources, se réclamant du\ndroit international classique, davantage compatible avec le principe de légalité,\net les pratiques normatives effectives du Tribunal, ressemblant à un\njusnaturalisme moderne, fondé sur des valeurs morales et éthiques.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".