MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545787869

Le Fédéralisme Coopératif entre Territorialité et Fonctionnalité: Le cas des Valeurs Mobilières (Cooperative Federalism and Securities Regulation)

2016· article· fr· W2545787869 on OpenAlexaffabout
Noura Karazivan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTaxation and Legal Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French Abstract: Dans la premiere partie de cet article, l'auteure expose les deux horizons analytiques qui ont caracterise le federalisme canadien, en portant une attention particuliere a la maniere dont chacun entrevoit le federalisme cooperatif: le premier, issu d’une approche territoriale ou dualiste, considere les competences exclusives comme un terrain a morceler et considere avec pessimisme le federalisme cooperatif. Le second repose sur une approche fonctionnelle axee sur l’interpretation pragmatique des chefs de competence et le rejet de l’etancheite du partage des pouvoirs et considere avec optimisme le federalisme cooperatif. Dans la deuxieme partie, l'auteure examine les manifestations actuelles du federalisme cooperatif canadien en distinguant deux dimensions : d’une part, une dimension potentielle qui se manifeste lorsque les tribunaux assouplissent les doctrines d’interpretation constitutionnelle dans le cadre de litiges portant sur le partage des competences; dans ces cas, il y a rarement presence de cooperation intergouvernementale ou interparlementaire; mais les juges vont employer le federalisme cooperatif afin de susciter une eventuelle cooperation entre les parties. D’autre part, une dimension actualisee de ce principe se manifeste lorsque les tribunaux prennent acte de la presence de regimes cooperatifs integres dans le cadre de litiges constitutionnels qu’ils sont appeles a decider. La troisieme partie de ce texte prend le litige des valeurs mobilieres comme point d’ancrage afin d’illustrer les potentialites du federalisme cooperatif dans un dossier aussi epineux que symboliquement charge.English Abstract: In the first part of this paper, the author explain Canadian federalism's two dominant paradigms, dualism and functionalism, to which she associates the writings of two former Supreme Court justices: Beetz and Laskin. The author focuses on the way each conceptual framework traditionally views cooperative federalism: respectively, with pessimism and optimism. In the second part, the author considers the current roles played by cooperative federalism, both judicially, as an invitation to cooperate, and politically, as a recognition of power sharing among federal and provincial executives. In the final part of this paper, the impact of cooperative federalism on the first, and the upcoming, references on securities regulation will be addressed, the author outlining the main challenges the new federal-provincial scheme raises.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicTaxation and Legal IssuesFrench-language works237,207