Liberté d'expression et diffamation de collectivités : quand le droit à l'égalité s'exprime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Class defamation, for reasons of race, ethnic origin, religion or sex, is in the middle of a confrontation between many rights and liberties : On the one hand, freedom of expression, often considered the most fundamental of them all ; On the other, equality rights, freedom of opinion and the right to security of the person. This conflict may be viewed as a test for freedom of expression, hoping that truth will finally prevail, as well as a challenge for other liberties to be recognized. A choice has to be made : Should we protect expression, or should we protect collectivities from some expression ? The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , it is submitted, has already indicated the right direction : Sections 27 and 28, multiculturalism and sex equality, do in fact exclude class defamation from the protected freedom of expression. That which is currently the law of class defamation, as a consequence, will remain. But this might be an unfortunate blessing, since class defamation is virtually non-existent in Canadian law.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".