Del referéndum a la secesión. El proceso quebequense de acceso a la soberanía y las lecciones aprendidas con respecto a la autodeterminación
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolComo resultado de los dos referenda sobre la soberania en 1980 y 1995, Quebec se ha convertido en un caso clave entre el resto de democracias occidentales. Se trata de un estado moderno desarrollado que intenta obtener su independencia, no en tiempo de guerra ni debido a una opresion politica grave, ni con el fin de poner fin a una ocupacion colonial de sus territorios o de liberarse de un sistema politico antidemocratico, sino por razones que son, en primera instancia, culturales, identitarias, linguisticas y economicas. En este sentido, y a pesar de la falta de exito en los dos intentos de referendum, la nacion quebequense aun debe ser reconocida por su rol pionero en cuanto a reconocer el derecho a la secesion de las naciones minoritarias. Al adoptar este enfoque, este articulo se centra en el proceso quebequense de acceso a la soberania y en las lecciones que puede mostrar, en este sentido, a una Espana multinacional. EnglishAs a result of the two referenda on sovereignty held in 1980 and 1995, Quebec has somehow become something of a figurehead for western democracies. It represents a modern developed state seeking national independence, not in time of war or because of serious political oppression, or to end colonial dependence in its territory or rid itself of an antidemocratic political system, but rather and above all by taking this path for cultural, identity, linguistic and economic reasons. In this regard, and notwithstanding the fact that both referenda failed to bring independence, it is still fair to grant the Quebequois nation a pioneering role in terms of recognising the right of minority nations to secede. In adopting this approach, this article looks at the Quebequois process of accessing sovereignty and the lessons that it can offer, in this regard, to a multinational Spain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".