MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7123742221 · doi:10.7202/1122209ar

Le critère de commercialité de l’Organisation pour l’harmonisation en Afrique du droit des affaires (OHADA) à travers le prisme de la décolonialité

2025· article· fr· W7123742221 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Jean-Louis Corréa, Moussa Diawara

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNew Caledonia Indigenous Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’efficacité et l’effectivité de la règle de droit requièrent sa conformité avec les agirs quotidiens de ses destinataires. L’Organisation pour l’harmonisation en Afrique du droit des affaires (OHADA), via la commercialité qu’elle postule, ne devrait pas perdre de vue cette exigence si elle aspire réellement au développement par l’intérieur. Repenser la commercialité s’inscrit dans cette perspective d’appropriation du droit OHADA par son ancrage dans les réalités socioéconomiques.

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)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.025
Scholarly communication0.0130.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicNew Caledonia Indigenous StudiesFrench-language works237,207