European unity in diversity?!: A conflicts-law re-construction of controversial current developments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The EU has come a long way since its foundation as the European Economic Community in 1957. Starting out as a purely economic union, the integration process has progressively entered into areas of political, social and cultural concern for the Member States. Meanwhile, the institutionalised ‘logic of the market’ and related harmonisation increasingly lead to tensions not only with varying socio-economic and legal systems, but also with different political and cultural perceptions. ‘Conflicts-law constitutionalism’ aims at developing new awareness for Europe’s conflict constellations and their (re-)interpretation with respect to socio-economic diversity, the social embeddedness of markets and the different regulatory cultures in the Member States. Therefore, it does not only serve for critical re-construction of the integration process but also aims at a ‘third way’ between the defence of the nation state and a quasi-federalist streamlining of Europe`s diversity. This is illustrated with five prominent and topical conflicts where market interests interfere with political, social and cultural preferences: the legendary Cassis de Dijon case, the labour law cases of Viking and Laval, the fully harmonised unfair commercial practices law, the promotion of renewable energies and the regulation of genetically-modified organisms. (Verlagsangabe)
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".