MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901921733 · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1g2482d

Jean-Charles Bonenfant et l’esprit des institutions

2018· book· fr· W2901921733 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses de l'Université Laval eBooks · 2018
Typebook
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Publiciste érudit, pédagogue accompli, Jean-Charles Bonenfant a influencé la manière dont on réfléchit les institutions politiques au Québec. Ses travaux font, en quelque sorte, office de trait d’union entre deux époques : celle qui a été marquée par les mandats de Maurice Duplessis comme premier ministre et celle de la Révolution tranquille. \n \nDans les coulisses de l’Assemblée nationale, comme directeur de la Bibliothèque, Jean-Charles Bonenfant a travaillé avec acharnement au développement d’un parlementarisme québécois qui redonnera un lustre aux institutions politiques. Grand historien de la Confédération, il a complété sa carrière d’enseignant, de chercheur et de chroniqueur en posant un regard résolument québécois, nuancé et pragmatique, sur le pacte de 1867. Par ses travaux et ses enseignements, il a contribué à forger la réputation d’excellence en droit public de la Faculté de droit de l’Université Laval. \n \nLe présent ouvrage offre, en un seul volume, l’essentiel des travaux de Jean-Charles Bonenfant sur la Confédération, sur l’évolution du fédéralisme ainsi que sur le parlementarisme québécois, en rééditant les principaux textes du juriste. S’y ajoute l’analyse d’une dizaine de chercheurs, issus de plusieurs disciplines, qui traitent avec brio des différentes facettes d’une œuvre qui demeure toujours juste et pertinente.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.004

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses de l'Université Laval eBooksSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207