L'évolution constitutionnelle de la relation entre le Québec et les peuples autochtones : le défi de l'interdépendance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'evocation d'une « evolution constitutionnelle » du Quebec rendra sans doute perplexes bon nombre d'observateurs de notre vie politique et juridique des quarante dernieres annees. La perception de stagnation, voire de regression, dans la recherche seculaire du Quebec d'un renouveau dans ses rapports avec la federation canadienne a en effet largement occulte les mutations profondes qui ont marque, pendant la meme epoque, notre relation avec les peuples autochtones. Pourtant, en quelques decennies, notre rapport aux premiers peuples a evolue au point de nous faire passer d'une relation typiquement coloniale a une dynamique constitutionnelle d'interdependance qui sera peut-etre elle-meme le prelude d'un mouvement, dans les prochaines decennies, vers une constitution de type postcolonial, c'est-a-dire fondee sur le principe d'egale dignite des nations. La difficulte persistante de notre inscription nationale dans l'ordre constitutionnel ne doit pas faire oublier que notre voisinage avec les autochtones engage, tout autant que le couple Quebec-Canada, les determinants fondamentaux de notre devenir que sont le partage de la legitimite historique, de la richesse et du pouvoir en ce coin d'Amerique. 71
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".