Lignes directrices facultatives en matière de pensions alimentaires pour époux – Pertinence de leur application au Québec?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".