Critères de qualification des acquêts et des Family Assets en droit québécois et ontarien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La nécessité de procéder au partage des biens des conjoints dont le régime matrimonial a été dissous par le divorce, la nullité du mariage ou la séparation, suppose l’étape préalable de détermination des différentes masses susceptibles d’une division quelconque. À ce chapitre, le juriste québécois a l’avantage d’avoir à sa portée les règles du Code civil qui établissent des critères fixes dont l’application permet de déterminer le caractère partageable ou non des patrimoines respectifs des époux. Par contre, le juriste ontarien n’a comme ressource que de rares règles écrites, largement complétées il est vrai par une abondante jurisprudence qui prône un système de qualification des patrimoines davantage relié au dynamisme perpétuel des masses. Pourtant, malgré ce cheminement divergent, les deux systèmes juridiques ont comme but ultime la reconnaissance de la situation d’égalité qui doit prévaloir entre les conjoints.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".