La résolution judiciaire du conflit (JDR) par les juges en Alberta : un modèle hybride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La résolution judiciaire des conflits par le juge (JDR) en Alberta, au Canada, a été développée par les juges. La médiation judiciaire ne constitue qu’une des techniques employées dans le cadre du JDR. Le JDR déroge au modèle de la justice forum public identifié par Garapon et Papadopoulos pour les pays de common law. Le JDR souffre d’une malencontreuse association avec la médiation extra judiciaire alors qu’elle s’en démarque sur plusieurs points. Il s’agit d’un modèle hybride, combinant des éléments de justice privée et de justice publique. Ses traits distinctifs, soit le rôle central du juge dans le JDR et le caractère confidentiel du processus, suscitent des craintes eu égard à la nature du système canadien de justice civile. Elles se révèlent non fondées. Le JDR, à titre complémentaire du procès, répond aux besoins des parties et ne menace pas le modèle de justice forum public.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".