MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2529611183 · doi:10.71781/1864

Surveillance électronique et métadonnées : vers une nouvelle conception constitutionnelle du droit à la vie privée au Canada?

2015· dissertation· fr· W2529611183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandre Thibeault

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire traite de la portée de la protection constitutionnelle du droit à la vie privée informationnelle au Canada, au regard de la surveillance électronique gouvernementale à grande échelle des métadonnées des communications électroniques, à des fins de sécurité nationale. Il est soutenu, après une présentation de l’importance démocratique de la vie privée, de même que de la nature et de la portée de certaines activités gouvernementales de surveillance électronique, que le cadre d’analyse du « Biographical core », qui conditionne l’étendue de la protection de la vie privée informationnelle en droit constitutionnel canadien, est susceptible d’inclure les métadonnées des communications électroniques. Cette position est appuyée par un argumentaire juridique fondé sur les règles d’interprétation et la jurisprudence constitutionnelle pertinente. Cet argumentaire se trouve renforcé par potentiel considérablement révélateur des métadonnées, des particularités propres aux activités de surveillance électronique analysées, ainsi que des implications non-juridiques soulevées par ces dernières.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.021
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)→Same topicCriminal Law and Evidence→French-language works237,207→