Les institutions de défense et de promotion des droits de la personne et du citoyen au Québec : un chaos apparent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En matière d’institutions des droits de la personne, le Québec est un terreau fertile. Certaines institutions assurent indirectement la protection de tels droits. C’est le cas du Protecteur du citoyen qui concentre ses efforts sur les abus de l’administration publique. Par ailleurs, la Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse a pour mandat de faire des enquêtes de discrimination et de rechercher des remèdes appropriés. Nous concluons à l’inter-fertilisation institutionnelle, laquelle sert au mieux les détenteurs de droits. Dorénavant, le Québec devra de plus composer avec des instruments juridiques municipaux qui prévoient, eux aussi, des mécanismes de plaintes en cas de violations de droits de l’homme, et ce à l’échelle du territoire urbain. Chaos ou cohérence en vue ?
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".