Bibliographic record
Abstract
Portant sur une affaire relative aux droits des couples non maries qui agite le Quebec depuis 2009, cet article compare son traitement par les tribunaux, l’expertise academique et la presse. S’inspirant du cadre d’analyse de la « forme affaire », il etudie le processus par lequel ce conflit prive hors-normes devient un probleme public, mobilisant une rhetorique des droits, en l’occurrence celui des couples non maries a etre traites egalement aux couples maries. Son analyse discute les travaux sur la « politique des droits », en interrogeant les conditions de succes des strategies judiciaires pour la reduction des inegalites, dans un contexte ou la mise a l’agenda echappe en large part aux mouvements sociaux, en particulier feministes. Les luttes definitionnelles entre les fractions des elites issues des trois espaces sociaux etudies construisent de nouveaux cadres cognitifs et moraux d’apprehension des droits des conjoints de fait, rendant pensable le changement social.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".