MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037281729 · doi:10.7202/042559ar

Le règlement des litiges commerciaux dans un système sans tribunaux de commerce : l'expérience québécoise

2005· article· en· W2037281729 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lubin Lilkoff

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawJurisdictionGermanCivil codePolitical scienceCivil procedureBusinessPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quebec's Civil Code acknowledges the existence of a dual regime including both civil and commercial juridical operations. This distinction, which is derived from French Law, also exists in Belgian and German Law. These countries have created specialized commercial courts or tribunals with jurisdiction over commercial matters. They are staffed with judges drawn from business. One may ask how in fact a dualistic system of this nature functions in Quebec, given the absence of such special commercial tribunals. It may be noted that although there is no body of commercial law dealing exclusively with traders, there exists in fact a system of business law comprehensive enough to apply also to non-traders (Part I). In addition, the informal nature of the procedural rules, as well as the background of the judges who are selected mainly from the ranks of practising lawyers, permits one to discern a close resemblance between litigation before these courts and the conduct of trials before commercial tribunals (Part II).

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.014
Scholarly communication0.0120.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicComparative and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207