La libertad religiosa en estados federales: a propósito de la Charte des Valeurs Québécoises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolCanada es un Estado Federal en el que la competencia sobre libertad religiosa la ostentan las provincias que lo componen. No obstante, la jurisprudencia de la Corte Suprema sobre el acomodo razonable constituye una base comun para toda la Federacion. Quebec ha intentado separarse de este modelo, y construir otro basado en la laicite a traves de la denominada Carta de Valores de Quebec. Este proyecto de ley supuso una fuerte controversia entre el gobierno de esta provincia, y la Federacion. Entre otros aspectos, se prohibian a todos los empleados publicos quebequenses cualquier vestimenta u ornamento personal de especial significado religioso. Esta polemica permite identificar elementos juridico-constitucionales a considerar en otros Estados compuestos. EnglishCanada is a federal state in which competition on religious freedom lies with the provinces that compose it. However, Supreme Court´s jurisprudence on reasonable accommodation constitutes a common basis for Federation. Quebec has attempted to secede from this model, and build one based on laicite through the so-called Quebec Charter of Values. This bill represented a strong controversy between the government provinces and the Federation. Among other things, all public employees of Quebec Government are prohibited any outfit special religious significance. This controversy can identify legal-constitutional elements prevent other states
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".