MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527490089 · doi:10.1017/cls.2016.18

Lignes directrices facultatives en matière de pensions alimentaires pour époux – Pertinence de leur application au Québec?

2016· article· fr· W2527490089 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jocelyne Jarry, Évelyne Lapierre‐Adamcyk, Céline Le Bourdais, Alain Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé L’approche sur laquelle reposent les Lignes directrices facultatives en matière de pensions alimentaires pour époux vise à instaurer plus de certitude et de prévisibilité dans la détermination des pensions alimentaires entre époux et ex-époux, divorcés ou en instance de l’être. Au moyen de formules basées sur les revenus des deux époux, leur âge respectif et la durée de leur cohabitation, ces lignes permettent de situer le montant et la durée de la pension alimentaire payable par le débiteur, à l’intérieur de fourchettes préétablies. L’analyse qui suit montre que les pensions alimentaires octroyées par les tribunaux québécois sont moins généreuses que celles qui résultent de l’application des Lignes directrices facultatives. En conclusion, on s’interroge sur les raisons des différences observées et sur la pertinence des Lignes directrices facultatives au Québec.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et SociétéSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207