De la structure constitutionnelle dans le Renvoi relatif à la réforme du Sénat: vers une Gestalt constitutionnelle? (Constitutional Structure and the Senate Reference: Towards a Canadian Constitutional Gestalt?)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: L'analyse structurelle en droit constitutionnel canadien est traditionnellement consideree comme decoulant des principes constitutionnels non ecrits. Or, dans le Renvoi relatif a la reforme du Senat, la Cour supreme propose une analyse structurelle affranchie des principes, et orientee vers les institutions faisant partie de la structure constitutionnelle canadienne. Dans une etude jurisprudentielle et doctrinale, l'auteure relate la maniere dont cette analyse structurelle nouvellement entendue modifie la theorie des sources: en proposant que la Constitution est superieure a la somme de ses parties ecrites, et non ecrites.English Abstract: Structural analysis in Canadian constitutional law, traditionnally a matter of underlying principles, is now shifting towards a process in which Courts seek to identify the key features that are essential to the proper functioning of structural institutions. The consequential entrenchement of those features profoundly modifies the constitutional landscape, and conveys the idea that the Constitution is more than the sum of its written and unwritten parts.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".