MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943811979 · doi:10.7202/1058348ar

Le droit au patrimoine familial et le droit à la succession : droits irréconciliables ?

2019· article· fr· W2943811979 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jacques Beaulne

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’introduction de la notion de patrimoine familial suscite de nombreuses questions lorsque la dissolution du mariage résulte du décès de l’un des conjoints. C’est à l’étude de trois de ces difficultés que s’attarde le présent texte. En premier lieu, l’auteur s’emploie à démontrer que certains facteurs tels la philosophie et la nature du nouveau régime, s’opposent à la transmissibilité du droit au partage du patrimoine familial en faveur de la succession d’un conjoint prédécédé. Dans un second temps, l’auteur attire l’attention sur les effets du cumul des droits découlant du patrimoine familial, des droits du régime matrimonial et de ceux de la succession, pour mettre en lumière la grande complexité d’un régime destiné à la fois à protéger le conjoint survivant et à rendre accessibles aux citoyens les dispositions du nouveau Code. Dans un dernier temps, l’auteur veut démontrer que le pouvoir d’attribution de biens accordé au tribunal ne saurait mettre de côté la liberté de tester reconnue par le Code.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207