Deconstructing Corporate Governance: Director Primacy Without Principle?

For almost eighty years now, corporate law scholarship has centered around two elementary analytical findings made in what has once been described as the “last major work of original scholarship”within the field

Sampling, Intervention, Prediction, Aggregation: A Generalized Framework for Model-Agnostic Interpretations

Model-agnostic interpretation techniques allow us to explain the behavior of any predictive model. Due to different notations and terminology, it is difficult to see how they are related. A unified view on these methods has been missing. We present the generalized SIPA (sampling, intervention, prediction, aggregation) framework of work stages for model-agnostic interpretations and demonstrate how several prominent methods for feature effects can be embedded into the proposed framework. Furthermore, we extend the framework to feature importance computations by pointing out how variance-based and performance-based importance measures are based on the same work stages. The SIPA framework reduces the diverse set of model-agnostic techniques to a single methodology and establishes a common terminology to discuss them in future work

Legal Classics: After Deconstructing the Legal Canon

The debate over the canon has gripped the University in recent years. Defenders of the canon argue that canonical texts embody timeless and universal themes, but critics argue that the process of canonization subordinates certain people and viewpoints within society in order to assert the existence of a univocal tradition. Originating primarily in the field of literary criticism, the canon debate recently has emerged in legal theory. Professor Francis J. Mootz argues that the issues raised by the canon debate are relevant to legal scholarship, teaching and practice. After reviewing the extensive commentary on the literary canon, Professor Mootz criticizes the polemical structure of the debate and asserts that an appreciation of classical, as opposed to canonical, texts opens the way for a productive inquiry. He defines a classical text as one that both shapes contemporary concerns and also serves as a point of reference for revising these concerns. Classical texts enable critical perspectives rather than submitting to them, he continues, because they provide the arena for debates about issues of public concern. Using Hadley v. Baxendale as an example of a legal classic, Professor Mootz contends that the power of such a classical text is its ability to shape hotly contested legal debates. Our time . . . seems unpropitious for thinking about the question of the classic, for . . . it seems to be a simple either/or that requires merely a choosing of sides: for or against? back to the classics or away from them? Our time calls not for thinking but a vote. And it may well be too late for thinking about the classic in any case, for the vote is already in, and the nays have it

From Bentham to Guadet: ‘auditory visibility’ in nineteenth-century theories on government offices

Architectural historiography is seldom concerned with the antithetical notions of ‘noise’ and ‘silence’. In this case study, I tentatively explore the theme in the context of nineteenth-century administrative buildings. More particularly, I investigate the normative views of British and French authors concerning acoustic perception in one subtype of ‘bureaucratic’ architecture: the ministerial office building. Drawing examples from the work of, among others, ‘panopticon’ theorist Jeremy Bentham and the architect Julien Guadet, I point at the centrality of ‘sound control’ or ‘sound management’ in architectural discourses on office buildings. In the specific domain of ministerial offices, moreover, these discourses were rife with ideological views on the nature and the functioning of government itself

The King's many bodies: the self-deconstruction of law's hierarchy

The article connects two strands of the recent sociolegal debate: (1) the empirical discovery of new forms of spontaneous law in die Course of globalization, and (2) the emergence of deconstructive theories of law that undermine the law's hierarchy. The article puts forward the thesis that law's hierarchy has successfully resisted all old and new attempts at its deconstruction; it breaks, however, under the pressures of globalization that produced a global law without the state, as self-created law of global society that has no institutionalized support whatsoever in international poliucs and public international law. Consequently, the article criticizes deconstructive theories for their lack of autological analysis. These theories do not take into account the historical condicions of deconstruction. Accordingly, deconstructive analysis of law would have to look for new legal distinctions that are plausible under the new condicions of a doubly fragmented global society. The article sketches the contours of an emerging polycontextural law