Responsabilité ministérielle, gouvernance démocratique et vérification juricomptable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le premier rapport Gomery détermine la responsabilité des acteurs politiques et administratifs, de même que des organisations, dans le cadre de ce scandale des commandites. Parmi les conclusions du rapport, on indique que le premier ministre Paul Martin et tous les ministres québécois ont été « exonérés de tout blâme pour imprudence ou négligence ». Ces conclusions, très tranchées, reposent-elles toutefois sur une compréhension juste de la convention constitutionnelle de la responsabilité ministérielle ? Reflète-t-elle correctement les dimensions individuelle et collective de cette responsabilité ministérielle ? L’interprétation du fonctionnement des institutions politiques et administratives fédérales que sous-tendent les conclusions de ce Rapport factuel est-elle adéquate ? Pour notre part, nous croyons que non : seul un manque de rigueur dans l’application du cadre d’analyse peut permettre une telle distribution de blâmes parmi les acteurs politiques et administratifs.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 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".