MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768616452 · doi:10.3406/ridc.2017.20859

La notion d’entreprise en droit québécois : aspects de droit positif et vision prospective

2017· article· fr· W2768616452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dieudonné Edouard Onguene Onana

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale de droit comparé · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent article présente les conclusions de la synthèse d’une notion ambigüe et incontournable en droit économique, celle d’entreprise, essentiellement à partir du droit québécois et dans une moindre mesure, du droit français. L’auteur démontre que plusieurs facteurs militent pour la refondation du processus de définition de cette notion en droit québécois. Il expose, dans ce cadre, les difficultés de sa consécration légale, la variété de ses tendances interprétatives et met à nu les dangers de l’incohérence des dispositions parallèles portant sur la notion. Plus encore, une analyse exhaustive de la critériologie habituellement associée à cette notion est effectuée. L’approche critique adoptée, à la fois transdisciplinaire et transjuridictionnelle, conduit à confirmer certains des critères actuels de la notion, mais met surtout en évidence de possibles critères substitutifs ou additionnels, inconnus ou habituellement minorés, qui pourraient en permettre une qualification plus précise et dans une perspective de lege ferenda qui se révèle nécessaire 23 ans après la réforme du Code civil du Québec.

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)0.003
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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.037
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale de droit comparéSame topicCorporate Governance and LawFrench-language works237,207