MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964743002 · doi:10.7202/040224ar

Le pouvoir exécutif et la judiciarisation de la politique au Canada. Une étude du Programme de contestation judiciaire

2008· article· fr· W1964743002 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Linda Cardinal

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitique et Sociétés · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude présente le Programme de contestation judiciaire comme un cas de figure du rôle de l’exécutif dans la judiciarisation de la politique au Canada. Mis en oeuvre par l’exécutif, le programme s’inscrit dans sa stratégie d’unité nationale. L’enthousiasme de l’exécutif pour le programme a toutefois été mis à rude épreuve lorsque les mouvements sociaux ont cherché à se l’approprier pour le mettre au service de leurs intérêts. Ainsi, l’étude du programme permet de nuancer les débats en cours sur la perte du pouvoir législatif au profit du système judiciaire et sert à rappeler le rôle central de l’exécutif dans cette transformation.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.018
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitique et SociétésSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207