MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083205979 · doi:10.7202/1120133ar

Accroître la nomination des femmes arbitres au sein des tribunaux arbitraux sportifs : la diversité au-delà du Tribunal arbitral du sport

2025· article· fr· W7083205979 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de droit international · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicMathematics, Computing, and Information Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalNominationContext (archaeology)Child custodyArbitration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le manque de diversité en arbitrage est fréquemment dénoncé. Une de ses manifestations est le faible taux de nominations de femmes sur des tribunaux arbitraux. Dans le domaine du sport, la situation est pire encore qu’en arbitrage commercial ou d’investissement. Le Tribunal arbitral du sport se classe ainsi bon dernier dans les statistiques de nominations de femmes arbitres, ainsi que dans les initiatives pour pallier ces problèmes. Cet article examine le rôle de ce dernier et des fédérations sportives, ainsi que les avenues qui pourraient les inspirer pour atteindre une meilleure représentativité au sein des tribunaux arbitraux.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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