Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Québec, l’union de fait est un dispositif juridique d’encadrement de la relation conjugale dont l’essentiel se trouve en creux dans le Code civil. Les provinces canadiennes de droit anglais encadrent explicitement la solution de rechange au mariage dans les lois qu’elles consacrent aux « relations domestiques » ou familiales. En France, le PACS et même le concubinage sont traités dans le Code civil. La situation québécoise est originale. Nous proposons de l’expliquer en montrant que l’union de fait, telle qu’elle existe aujourd’hui dans le droit québécois, est très proche du mariage tel qu’il existait dans le droit romain de l’époque classique. Cet examen nous permet de suggérer que le Québec a réinventé, ou redécouvert, le mariage romain de l’époque classique sous la forme de l’union de fait telle qu’elle s’y pratique. Il nous permet également de suggérer que l’« union de fait à la québécoise » est peut-être une construction plus cohérente que le mariage dans sa forme actuelle.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
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".