MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055392249

The "Civil Solidarity Pact" (PACS) in France an impossible evaluation

2001· article· en· W7055392249 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchined · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentSolidarityQuarter (Canadian coin)Developed countryGay rightsCohabitation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the fall of 1999, the French Parliament passed a law offering the possibility for unmarried couples to acquire a legal status thanks to the “Civil Solidarity Pact” (Pacte Civil de Solidarité), or PACS. The PACS is open to both heterosexual and homosexual couples. From the date the law was enacted — November 15, 1999 — until the end of March 2001, approximately 37,000 PACS were registered (6,211 in 1999, 23,644 in 2000, and 7,238 during the first quarter of 2001). Northern European countries were the first, about twelve years ago, to make provisions for the legal recognition of unmarried couples; southern European countries gradually followed suit. Nonetheless, the countries which have implemented such laws are a small and heterogeneous group: in Scandinavia, only homosexual couples are concerned by new protection laws, and their rights are very similar to those of heterosexual married couples; in the Netherlands, in France and in other countries where similar bills are now under study, the law targets both homosexual and heterosexual couples and offers them an option which is often quite different from marriage

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.303 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchinedSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207