MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522351668

The Hidden Ally: How the Canadian Supreme Court Has Advanced the Vitality of the Francophone Quebec Community

2015· article· en· W2522351668 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas Stuart Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueOhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitalitySupreme courtFrenchPolitical scienceLawSociologyTheologyHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, the Canadian Supreme Court has become a much more powerful and influential player in the Canadian political and social landscape.As such, the Court has struck down certain sections of the Charter of the French Language (Bill 101) as contrary to the Constitution, 1867 and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.In Ford v. Québec, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712, for instance, the Court found unconstitutional that portion of Bill 101 that required commercial signage to be in French only.After the decision was announced, public riots broke out in Montreal.As a result of this decision, one could conclude that the Court has, in fact, resisted Québec's attempts to protect and promote its own language and culture.In this dissertation, however, I argue that this perception is not justified, primarily because it fails to recognize how Canadian federalism protects diversity within the Confederation.Contrary to the initial public reaction to the Ford case, my contention is that the Court has, in fact, advanced and protected the vitality of Francophone Québec by developing three fundamental principles.The first principle is institutional integrity.Under this principle, the Court has advanced the rule of law in Canada by protecting the integrity of the process by which members of the Court and Senate are chosen.This is important because both institutions are particularly important to the balance of power and the protection of minority groups within the Confederation,including minority language communities.The second principle is Canadian federalism.iii Under this principle the Court has developed a jurisprudence in which the provinces retain sufficient legislative power to manage their own internal affairs, and in the case of Québec, particularly those relating to language and education.The third principle is constitutional dialogue.Under this principle, the Court encourages a constitutional dialogue between the political actors, after the Court has struck down a law as unconstitutional, that maximizes the democratic process and Québec's ability to protect and advance the Francophone culture.As a result of these principles, the Court has created the legal framework that not only has enabled Québec to protect and promote its language and culture, but also developed those overreaching constitutional principles that strengthen the Canadian Confederation.iv

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)0.017
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0590.024
Scholarly communication0.0220.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0090.010
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network)Same topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207