Vers la répression de la propagande haineuse basée sur le sexe ? Quelques arguments pour une redéfinition de la notion de « groupe identifiable » prévue dans le Code criminel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les articles 318 et 319 du Code criminel sont destinés à protéger les groupes identifiables de personnes contre la propagande haineuse. Toutefois, l’article 318 (4) limite cette protection aux seuls groupes identifiables par la couleur, la race, la religion, l’origine ethnique et l’orientation sexuelle. Le sexe est exclu des motifs de différenciation énumérés dans ce paragraphe. Après un bref examen de l’historique législatif de ces dispositions, de même que de l’évolution récente du droit canadien et international, l’auteur note que l’exclusion du sexe comme motif de différenciation est pour le moment dépassée. Il en vient alors à la conclusion que l’article 318 (4) du Code criminel mériterait d’être extensivement reformulé en vue d’accorder une protection efficace aux victimes des discours haineux basés sur le sexe.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".