MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738480503 · doi:10.7202/1040516ar

La judiciarisation de l’itinérance à Montréal : les dérives sécuritaires de la gestion pénale de la pauvreté

2017· article· fr· W2738480503 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Partant d’une présentation des perspectives théoriques sur la judiciarisation des problèmes sociaux et de l’espace public, le présent article a pour objet d’exposer les résultats de recherches sur la judiciarisation de l’itinérance à Montréal. Grâce à l’extraction de données à la Cour municipale de Montréal, entre les années 1994 et 2010, ces recherches ont permis d’appréhender l’ampleur et le parcours des contraventions délivrées à la population itinérante montréalaise, en vertu des réglementations municipales. Il s’agira ainsi de présenter l’évolution du recours à la contraventionnalisation, les motifs des infractions, les caractéristiques des personnes judiciarisées, ainsi que le parcours des contraventions, de leur délivrance à l’éventuel emprisonnement du contrevenant pour non-paiement de l’amende. Enfin, l’article cherchera à montrer les effets négatifs de la judiciarisation tant pour les personnes en situation d’itinérance que pour le système pénal dans son ensemble.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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