MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948462574

LES PRESOMPTIONS LEGALES DE FAUTE ET DE RESPONSABILITE S’APPLIQUENT-ELLES AU CONTRAT?

2007· article· fr· W2948462574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claude Fabien

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Bar Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLaw, Economics, and Judicial Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatorLawLegal liabilityPolitical scienceLaw and economicsLiabilitySociologyLegislation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do legal presumptions of fault and liability apply to the contract? This is a controversial issue in Quebec civil law. The so called extensive theory defended by the author holds that these presumptions apply as much to contractual as to extra-contractual liability. From the point of view of fairness, it is preferable for the legislator to favour equal treatment of the victims of identical circumstances, when the only variable is the existence of a contractual relationship. This is in fact what the legislator did when revising the Civil Code of Quebec, by incorporating these presumptions as a supplement to the contract. Parties remain free to exclude them, except with respect to bodily or moral injury, where they are a matter of public policy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.232 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Bar ReviewSame topicLaw, Economics, and Judicial SystemsFrench-language works237,207