Multiculturalism, Secession and Constitutional Amendments: Québec’s Statut Particulier in the View of Canadian Immigration Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Die traditionelle rechtswissenschaftliche Analyse und Methode wird in den Beiträgen durch Einbeziehung anderer Disziplinen und Forschungsgebiete geöffnet und erweitert. Professor Ortino sah in der (Selbst-)Beschränkung auf rechtswissenschaftliche Fragen immer ein Hindernis für die richtige Deutung neuer technologischer und sozialer Herausforderungen. Nur ein weiter Blick, über fachliche Grenzen hinweg, erlaubt es komplexe rechtliche Phänomene und deren Entwicklungsprozesse besser zu verstehen und auf sie zu reagieren. Aus diesem Grund konnte Professor Ortino rechtliche Entwicklungen lange vor anderen aufzeigen und einschätzen. Insbesondere die Arbeiten aus den letzten zwanzig Jahren seiner herausragenden Karriere zeigen, wie weitsichtig seine Forschung war. So schrieb er bereits über Globalisierungsprozesse lange bevor diese allgemein zum Forschungsgegenstand wurden.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".