Les Liens De L’Adopté en Droit Civil et Common Law (The Adoptee's Bonds in Civil Law and Common Law)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: La reforme du regime d’adoption au Quebec, une juridiction civiliste entouree par la common law, occasionne des reflexions concernant les attentes des traditions juridiques a l’egard du droit en matiere familiale. Le discours scientifique relatif a deux facons de reconnaitre le passe de l’adopte, soit l’adoption simple et l’adoption ouverte, est revelateur. Dans le but d’honorer les origines de l’adopte, les civilistes soulignent davantage que leurs homologues de la common law l’importance du lien juridique. La question du poids du lien juridique souleve celle plus large des rapports qu’entretiennent le droit civil et la common law avec le non-droit. Quoiqu’il apparaisse que le droit civil peine a reconnaitre des pratiques sociales hors de ses categories, une lecture approfondie du regime de l’adoption et un rappel d’un courant minoritaire au sujet de la coutume nuanceront le portrait. English Abstract: Reforms to adoption law in Quebec, a civilian jurisdiction surrounded by the common law, prompts reflections regarding legal traditions’ expectations of law in family matters. Scholarly debate concerning two ways of recognizing the past of an adopted person – simple adoption and open adoption – proves revealing. With the aim of honouring the adopted person’s origins, civilians emphasize the importance of the legal bond more than do their common-law counterparts. This question of the significance of the legal bond raises the larger matter of the civil law’s and common law’s relations with non-law. While it seems that the civil law struggles to recognize social practices outside its legal categories, a close reading of adoption law and a minority current relating to custom enrich the account.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".