Un entretien avec le professeur emerite Joseph E. Roach (An Interview with Professor Emeritus Joseph E. Roach)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Des leurs premiers jours sur les bancs de la Faculte de droit, les etudiants et les etudiantes du Programme de common law en francais de l’Universite d’Ottawa sont rapidement confrontes a un personnage hors du commun. Au fil des trente dernieres annees, et malgre la profonde humilite qui le caracterise, le professeur emerite Joseph E. Roach en est venu a symboliser la fraternite, la collegialite et l’excellence academique qui animent ce programme. Tant en ce qui a trait a ses origines et a son evolution, l’enseignement de la common law en francais a l’Universite d’Ottawa demeure, a toutes fins pratiques, indissociable des contributions du professeur Roach. En effet, on pourrait difficilement imaginer l’un sans l’autre. Les etudiants et les etudiantes du Programme de common law francais se souviendront tous et toutes de la passion et du sens de l’humour vehicules par le professeur Roach dans l’enseignement du droit des biens.English Abstract: Dans les prochaines pages ressortent des anecdotes parfois surprenantes sur les experiences d’un des premiers diplomes de la Section de common law, mais surtout le recit d’une vie qui continue a animer les couloirs de la Faculte de droit. En automne 2011, Nicholas Malone, ancien Redacteur en chef, accompagne par les Redactrices et Redacteurs adjoints Dana Antakly, Darius Bosse et Ariane Courtemanche de la Revue de droit d’Ottawa, ont eu l’occasion de discuter avec le professeur Roach au cours de plusieurs entretiens de sa vie, de sa carriere, et de la creation et la progression du Programme de common law en francais de l’Universite d’Ottawa. La Revue de droit d’Ottawa tient egalement a remercier le professeur Yves LeBouthilier et Helene Laporte.Students who join the French Common Law Program at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law soon find themselves in the presence of a unique individual. Over the past thirty years, and in spite of his great humility, Professor Emeritus Joseph E. Roach has come to symbolize the fellowship, collegiality and academic excellence that characterize this program. From its earliest days, and throughout the development of the program over those years, the teaching of French Common Law at the University of Ottawa has been essentially inseparable from Professor Roach’s contributions, to the point that it would be hard to imagine one without the other. Students in the French Common Law Program will all remember the passion and humour brought to property law by Professor Roach.In the following pages are surprising anecdotes about the experiences of one of the first graduates of the Common Law Section, but mostly the life story of a man whose presence continues to be felt in the corridors of the Faculty of Law. In the fall of 2011, Nicholas Malone, a former Editor-in-Chief, accompanied by Assistant Editors Dana Antakly, Darius Bosse and Ariane Courtemanche, had the opportunity to interview Professor Roach about his life, his career and the creation and evolution of the French Common Law Program at the University of Ottawa. The Ottawa Law Review wishes to thank Professor Yves LeBouthilier and Helene Laporte.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".