MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947836574 · doi:10.7202/1059146ar

Incidences de la réforme du droit de la famille sur le rôle des juges au Québec

2019· article· fr· W2947836574 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dominique Goubau

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La réforme du droit de la famille a eu d’importantes incidences procédurales. Dans la foulée du courant de droit récent en faveur de la négociation, la médiation et le règlement des conflits dans l’intérêt premier des enfants, le juge se voit confier une nouvelle mission et se trouve doté de pouvoirs d’intervention élargis. L’auteur analyse l’impact judiciaire de la réforme en constatant le recul du caractère contradictoire et conflictuel des débats. Le contentieux familial échappe de plus en plus à la conception traditionnelle du procès civil et l’auteur conclut en se demandant si le juge est suffisamment outillé pour faire face à son rôle nouveau.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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