MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975855491 · doi:10.7202/1028084ar

La responsabilité du Monarque : du nid de poule à Walkerton

2015· article· fr· W1975855491 on OpenAlexaffvenue
André Braën

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les interventions croissantes de l’État dans la vie moderne ont accru, parallèlement et d’une manière significative, le contentieux de sa responsabilité. Alors qu’au départ aucune faute ne pouvait être imputée au Monarque, tant le législateur que les tribunaux ont par la suite façonné, non sans difficultés, un régime spécifique pour encadrer la responsabilité de l’administration publique. Mais encore aujourd’hui, ce régime reste fort nuancé et complexe. Des distinctions entre légalité et responsabilité, entre immunité et responsabilité, entre les divers types de responsabilité (pénale, contractuelle ou délictuelle), entre les sources juridiques (loi ou common law) à la base de l’acte générateur de responsabilité, entre son caractère discrétionnaire ou simplement opérationnel, restent essentielles pour qui veut bien saisir l’évolution de ce régime et ses tendances. Ce dernier interpelle en bout de piste notre propre conception de la démocratie dans laquelle la Cité elle-même verrait de plus en plus sa sphère politique définie et délimitée par les tribunaux judiciaires.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207