MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589133312 · doi:10.17118/11143/9921

Affaire de la nomination du juge Mainville à la Cour d’appel du Québec : une concession et trois critiques

2015· article· fr· W2589133312 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Maxime St-Hilaire

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de droit Université de Sherbrooke · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans le jugement qu’elle a rendu oralement le 24 avril 2015 par la bouche du juge Wagner, la Cour suprême du Canada a rapidement rejeté le pourvoi formé contre l’avis de la Cour d’appel du Québec du 23 décembre 2014 selon lequel la nomination, à titre de membre de celle-ci, d’un candidat qui jusqu’alors était juge à la Cour d’appel fédérale, n’était pas inconstitutionnelle en vertu de l’article 98 de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867. Au moyen de trois critiques de l’avis de la Cour d’appel du Québec, le texte qui suit vise à la démonstration du fait que cette affaire méritait, de la part de la Cour suprême, un véritable délibéré.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de droit Université de SherbrookeSame topicLegal and Social PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207