MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963240845

LE LIVRE X DU CODE CIVIL DU QUEBEC : BILAN ET ENJEUX

2010· article· fr· W2963240845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Serge Gaudet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Bar Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtLawJurisprudencePolitical scienceCivil codeConflict of lawsJurisdiction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An analysis of private international law jurisprudence in Quebec over the last fifteen years reveals the definite prevalence of cases involving conflict of jurisdictions. Accordingly, it is not surprising that these are matters which have been entertained by the Supreme Court of Canada since the Civil Code of Quebec came into force. For fifteen years now, the core of the work done by the courts, in particular the Supreme Court, has related to the interpretation or implementation of the new conflict of jurisdiction rules. This will be the topic of the first part. The second part offers some brief thoughts on the issues that could make legal headlines in this area in the years ahead.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Bar ReviewSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207