MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980186028 · doi:10.7202/1006415ar

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

2011· article· fr· W1980186028 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Amissi Manirabona

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207