MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052087121 · doi:10.7202/042742ar

L'aide sociale et le prêt, les droits extrapatrimoniaux et l'assurance-chômage

2005· article· en· W2052087121 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christian Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in South Africa
Canadian institutionsCollège de Maisonneuve
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoanInterpretation (philosophy)WelfareDamagesSocial WelfarePolitical scienceScope (computer science)Section (typography)UnemploymentSocial Security ActLawSocial assistanceSociologyLaw and economicsEconomicsBusinessEconomic growthSocial securityFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies different aspects of a particular concept of social welfare, namely assistance in the form of a loan versus standard nonrefundable assistance. It begins with an historical and jurisprudential analysis of section 13 of the Social Welfare Act which allows this kind of loan. This background is essential for grasping the goals and the bearing of the Social Welfare Act. This study mainly covers two situations which have raised and still are raising numerous controversies. First, an analysis is made of conditions and prospects of people requesting a loan from Social Welfare while awaiting unemployment compensations. Second, the study focuses on important litigation between beneficiaries of Social Welfare who have been granted extrapatrimonial damages and how the interpretation to be given to section 13 of this Act has been administered. Not only is an attempt made to determine the Social Affaires Commission's standpoint on these two matters, but the study also assesses the view of the Civil courts. Finally, within the scope of this study, the latest amendments to section 13 are reviewed and commented upon.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicLegal Issues in South AfricaFrench-language works237,207