MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118007658 · doi:10.15781/jbbrg222

Constitutional Ambition and Humility in an Age of Extremes; L’ambition et l’humilité constitutionnelles à l’ère des extrêmes

2025· article· en· W7118007658 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueTexas Digital Library (University of Texas) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicEducation, Psychology, and Complexity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutional lawHumilityPoliticsState (computer science)ConstitutionRelevance (law)Public lawComparative law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Are we really living through an age of extremes? If so, how should constitutional law respond? Despite its importance, constitutional law is, at best, a partial response. We need to reconstruct and better situate constitutional law for an age of extremes. This article advances five claims: first, that as a potential tool for complex problem-solving, constitutional law must, with humility, acknowledge its parochial nature; second, that what counts as law and what counts as constitutional law both need to be pluralized; third, that constitutional law’s continued relevance depends on its ability to engage with other disciplines in a holistic, coordinated, and relational way; fourth, that, drawing on its strengths, constitutional law might attend to the polycentric and asymmetrical nature of governance; and fifth, that to the extent that constitutional law still matters, it needs to cultivate and embed in its users the skills required for holistic problem-solving to thrive. Constitutional law will continue to have a role in dealing with political violence, corrupt officials, political attacks on universities, and petty tyrants, but we can also pursue a more cosmopolitan vision of constitutionalism, one that embraces a holistic, cosmopolitan approach to the linear, territorially bound understandings of modern state law, one that can help guide us through turbulent times. Vivons-nous réellement une ère d’extrêmes ? Si oui, comment le droit constitutionnel doit-il y répondre ? Malgré son importance, le droit constitutionnel n’apporte, au mieux, qu’une réponse partielle. Il est nécessaire de le repenser et de mieux l’adapter à cette ère d’extrêmes. Cet article avance cinq arguments : premièrement, en tant qu’outil potentiel de résolution de problèmes complexes, le droit constitutionnel doit, avec humilité, reconnaître son caractère limité ; deuxièmement, il convient de pluraliser la notion de droit et celle de droit constitutionnel ; troisièmement, la pertinence continue du droit constitutionnel repose sur sa capacité à interagir avec d’autres disciplines de manière holistique, coordonnée et relationnelle; quatrièmement, le droit constitutionnel, fort de ses atouts, pourrait prendre en compte la nature polycentrique et asymétrique de la gouvernance. Cinquièmement, dans la mesure où le droit constitutionnel conserve toute son importance, il doit cultiver et ancrer chez ses utilisateurs les compétences nécessaires à une résolution holistique des problèmes. Le droit constitutionnel continuera de jouer un rôle face à la violence politique, la corruption des fonctionnaires, les attaques politiques contre les universités et la tyrannie, mais nous pouvons aussi envisager une vision plus cosmopolite du constitutionnalisme, une vision qui embrasse une approche holistique et cosmopolite des conceptions linéaires et territorialement cloisonnées du droit étatique moderne, une vision susceptible de nous guider en période de turbulences.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.243 · 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