MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074014417 · doi:10.7202/042985ar

Consolidation et rupture: les ambiguïtés de la réforme des contrats nommés

2005· article· fr· W2074014417 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Pierre Legrand

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les contrats nommés occupent, avec la réforme du droit des obligations que nous propose le législateur québécois, une place de choix en droit privé contemporain. Le droit positif qui est mis de l'avant fait, pour l'essentiel, oeuvre de consolidation. L'on note ainsi un mouvement de publicisation accru du droit privé, le législateur reprenant à cet égard les thèmes de la solidarité contractuelle et de l'objectivation du contrat. Ce phénomène se double d'une atomisation prononcée du droit des contrats, la matière de ceux-ci se voyant divisée en dix-huit blocs étanches. Il demeure que c'est cependant sur le plan de l'expression de la réforme que les ruptures avec la tradition civiliste sont les plus fortement ressenties. Tant en raison du style, emprunté à la tradition de common law que de la langue, opaque et incohérente, le législateur met en danger la crédibilité même de son entreprise de codification.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicLegal and Social PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207