MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173892355 · doi:10.4000/ethiquepublique.1775

Le protecteur du citoyen : un rempart contre l’arbitraire

2007· article· fr· W2173892355 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raymonde Saint-Germain

Bibliographic record

VenueÉthique Publique · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsLa Cité Médicale
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nommé par l’Assemblée nationale envers qui seulement il a l’obligation de rendre des comptes, le protecteur du citoyen a pour mandat de veiller au respect des droits des citoyens en intervenant auprès des ministères et des organismes relevant du gouvernement du Québec. Dans ce texte, le protecteur du citoyen décrit son rôle en tant que gardien de l’éthique gouvernementale. Rempart contre l’arbitraire, il prétend que pour l’éviter le pouvoir discrétionnaire doit être guidé par des normes et des valeurs de l’État de droit. Le protecteur du citoyen dégage en ce sens certaines grandes valeurs à respecter pour y arriver, comme par exemple l’équité et la transparence.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.029
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉthique PubliqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207