MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802172532 · doi:10.7202/1044884ar

GRANDS PAS ET FAUX PAS DE LACOMPÉTENCE INHÉRENTE DESTRIBUNAUX EN DROIT CANADIEN DEL’INSOLVABILITÉ : QUI FAIT LA LOI ?

2009· article· fr· W2802172532 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Antoine Leduc

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue du notariat · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GRANDS PAS ET FAUX PAS DE LA COMPÉTENCE INHÉRENTE DES TRIBUNAUX EN DROIT CANADIEN DE L’INSOLVABILITÉ : QUI FAIT LA LOI ?. Un article de la revue Revue du notariat (LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINE) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue du notariatSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207