MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512236206 · doi:10.7202/1007659ar

La religion « saisie » par le droit. Comment l’État laïque définit-il la religion au Québec et en France ?1

2012· article· fr· W1512236206 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Koussens

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sociographiques · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyConsciencePolitical scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Après avoir montré pourquoi un État laïque ne peut se contenter d’ignorer le fait religieux, mais doit à l’inverse s’en saisir afin de garantir la liberté de conscience et de religion des citoyens, cet article propose d’explorer les conceptions de la religion véhiculées par le droit en contextes québécois et français. S’appuyant sur des sources primaires de nature juridique (textes de lois et jurisprudences), l’analyse retrace comment l’État définit la religion comme une notion fonctionnelle comportant des conséquences pour l’expression collective des groupes concernés.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sociographiquesSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207