MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078356275 · doi:10.7202/042793ar

L'actualisation des dommages-intérêts en matière de préjudice corporel

2005· article· en· W2078356275 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Daniel K. Gardner

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndemnityContext (archaeology)DiscountingProductivityWelfare economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceActuarial scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1978 the evaluation of pecuniary loss resulting from personal injury genuinely derives from the restitutio in integrum principle. In this context the operation of discounting the portion of the lump sum indemnity representing the victim's future losses takes on particular importance. The method used by the Supreme Court has been considerably improved: the refusal to consider interest rates and inflation rates separately, the recognition of a productivity factor for losses representing future salaries, etc. Four provinces have decided to legislate on one or more discount rates to make up for the absence or inadequacy of evidence at this level. Despite legislative and courtroom activity, much remains to be done in improving both the present legal system and its replacement by a regime better adapted to the specific problems inherent in evaluating pecuniary losses.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.025
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesFrench-language works237,207