MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1549686016 · doi:10.7202/001241ar

Prolégomènes à une études historique des rapports entre l’État et le droit dans la société québécoise, de la fin du XVIII e siècle à la crise de 1929

2002· article· fr· W1549686016 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jean-Marie Fecteau

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologie et sociétés · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La prépondérance actuelle de la régulation sociale sous une forme juridique présuppose l'existence de cet appareil centralisé qu'est l'État. Le modèle libéral ne sépare pas réellement le public et le privé: libéralisation du marché et réglementation étatique y vont de pair. Dans cette optique, l'auteur examine le développement historique concomitant du droit et de l'État modernes au Québec. Déclin du modèle colonial d'abord (1760-1830), quand la crise du système normatif devient très vite une question de souveraineté: la faculté royale de produire et d'appliquer le droit se heurte à la notion révolutionnaire de la légitimité démocratique. Ensuite (1830-1885), autonomisation relative du droit comme mode de normalisation et légitimité démocratique de l'État et de ses appareils de réglementation et de gestion. Enfin (1885-1930), remise en question par le mouvement ouvrier de l'idéologie de la séparation du public et du privé et développement rapide du droit public, au point de remettre bientôt en cause le droit privé comme catégorie juridique autonome.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociologie et sociétésSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207