L’autonomie gouvernementale autochtone, le droit et le politique, ou la difficulté d’établir des normes en la matière
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article traite des rapports étroits qu’entretiennent le droit et le politique dans le débat entourant l’autonomie gouvernementale autochtone au Canada. Il propose, à l’aide d’une revue des écrits et des événements récents, une discussion sur la place des tribunaux canadiens dans ce champ politique et sur les limites de leurs interventions. Le texte présente une relecture de l’opposition usuelle entre droit et politique, par le biais d’une réflexion plus générale sur les différents types et enjeux de pouvoir qui sont au coeur du débat. Selon l’auteur, la judiciarisation des débats sur l’autonomie gouvernementale s’intègre dans des discussions plus vastes sur les normes et les valeurs fondatrices de la société. Plus concrètement, cette judiciarisation serait symptomatique de la complexité d’une gestion de l’autonomie gouvernementale à un niveau plus politique.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".