MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Le droit à un recours effectif au sens de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme

2013· dissertation· W7143306418 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriela-Adriana Rusu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Immigration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationConventionFundamental rightsQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le droit à un recours effectif constitue une disposition clé de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme. En vertu de l'article 13 de la Convention, toute personne ayant un "grief défendable" tiré d'une violation des droits conventionnels, doit bénéficier d'un recours effectif devant une autorité nationale. Le droit à un recours effectif vient ainsi consolider la protection des droits conventionnels au niveau interne. Par conséquent, il établit avant tout une garantie supplémentaire qui renforce l'effectivité des droits substantiels. Dans le même temps, l'article 13 contient à la fois un droit subjectif procédural dont la violation peut être constatée par la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, ainsi qu'une obligation étatique découlant de l'obligation générale de protection des droits de l'homme. Il est ainsi l'expression du principe de subsidiarité et permet aux Etats parties de remédier eux-mêmes aux violations des droits conventionnels. Dans un souci d'efficacité, le juge européen a enrichi de plus en plus le contenu du droit à un recours effectif, qui semble se transformer en droit à un recours juridictionnel effectif.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.004

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Rights and ImmigrationFrench-language works237,207