MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7123483551 · doi:10.7202/1122203ar

L’impartialité du juge constitutionnel en Afrique noire francophone

2025· article· fr· W7123483551 on OpenAlex
Alia Diaby

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Politics and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceContext (archaeology)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’impartialité du juge consiste en l’absence de parti pris. Dernier-né des juges africains ayant émergé à la faveur de la démocratisation des années 1990, le juge constitutionnel se doit dans l’examen de constitutionnalité, a priori comme a posteriori, de peser le pour et le contre des moyens exposés devant lui et de n’avoir aucun préjugé. Toutefois, le procès constitutionnel oppose plutôt les normes. Les audiences ne sont pas publiques, et la procédure en matière constitutionnelle n’est pas contradictoire et manque de garanties, comme la récusation et le déport. Par ailleurs, l’impartialité est proclamée par les constitutions des différents États. Le juge constitutionnel, qui a une vie avant et après le mandat, tente d’assumer son impartialité sous la menace du pouvoir politique et de l’opinion publique, ainsi que l’atteste la jurisprudence de plusieurs juridictions, en particulier du Bénin, du Mali, du Sénégal et de la Centrafrique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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