Rhapsody on Form and Substance in Legal Harmonization (Rhapsodie Sur La Forme Et Le Fond De L’Harmonisation Juridique)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ways in which the harmonization of federal and provincial law undertaken by the federal government differs from its namesake, musical harmony, illuminate crucial controversies regarding theories of Canadian federalism and legal philosophy. While the legal harmonization project, as conceived by its designers, can be characterized as top-down, and consistent with legal positivism, musical harmony is better viewed as bottom-up, an approach more consistent with legal pluralism. Were it to attain its objectives, the legal harmonization project would entrench a vision of the civil law as belonging exclusively to the government of Quebec. Despite its architects’ ambitions, however, the harmonization project, in its implementation, has shown itself to be unruly, generating many debates and questions. Far from being negative, these debates and disagreements are themselves part of the practice of harmonization. (L’auteur soutient que les aspects par lesquels l’harmonisation du droit federal avec les droits communs provinciaux qui a ete entreprise par le gouvernement federal differe de son eponyme, l’harmonie musicale, soulevent de cruciales controverses relatives aux theories du federalisme canadien et a la philosophie du droit. Tandis que le projet d’harmonisation juridique, tel que concu par ses architectes, peut se caracteriser comme top-down, une approche conforme avec le positivisme juridique, l’harmonie musicale est mieux caracterisee comme bottom-up, une approche plus conforme avec le pluralisme juridique. Si elle atteignait ses objectifs, l’initiative d’harmonisation juridique aurait comme effet d’enchâsser une vision selon laquelle le droit civil appartient exclusivement au gouvernement quebecois. Or, malgre les ambitions de ses architectes, l’initiative d’harmonisation, mise en execution, se revele refractaire, soulevant de nombreux debats et interrogations. D’ailleurs, loin d’etre un signe negatif, les debats et les desaccords font eux-memes partie de la pratique de l’harmonisation.)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".