Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’accès à la justice et, tel qu’il est discuté dans le texte qui suit, l’accès aux tribunaux demeurent un mythe aux yeux de plusieurs citoyens, en raison notamment des frais juridiques trop élevés, du système judiciaire qui se distingue par sa complexité et du peu de confiance de la population envers le système judiciaire. La faible valeur pécuniaire d’un recours potentiel et les achats à l’étranger par Internet sont également susceptibles de décourager certains consommateurs. Quelques tentatives de solutions qui siéent bien aux problèmes de consommation ont été proposées au fil des ans. Outre l’aide juridique, qui demeure inaccessible pour la grande majorité de la population, il faut mentionner l’assurance frais juridiques, le recours en dommages devant la Cour des petites créances, le recours collectif et l’accès alternatif à la justice par l’entremise des méthodes extrajudiciaires de résolution des conflits.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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".