MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738725617 · doi:10.7202/1040520ar

Accompagnement et injonctions sociales dans les tribunaux de santé mentale

2017· article· fr· W2738725617 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Audrey-Anne Dumais Michaud

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesTribunalPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis les années 90, les tribunaux spécialisés ont émergé dans le paysage judiciaire. Cet article s’intéresse particulièrement aux tribunaux de santé mentale, conceptualisés comme étant le fruit d’une hybridation entre le droit et la psychiatrie. S’inscrivant dans le cadre d’une thèse, cet article exposera la manière dont les discours concernant la santé mentale et la normativité sociale sont intégrés dans ce type de tribunal et influencent leurs pratiques. Plus précisément, il sera illustré que les injonctions liées au récit biographique, à la responsabilité et à l’activation sont déterminantes dans le parcours des personnes interpellées par ce tribunal. Le regard transversal permettra d’éclairer la tension entre vulnérabilité sociale et régulation pénale des problèmes sociaux complexes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207