Nouvelles lois en Australie en termes d’esclavage moderne : Où en est le Canada ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le sujet de l’esclavage moderne, à l’image de la protection des droits de l’homme, donne lieu à une réflexion juridique intéressante. Plusieurs initiatives législatives ont récemment traité de cette problématique pour mettre en place un encadrement réglementaire spécifique ou le resserrer. Il en va ainsi de la Californie, du Royaume-Uni, de la France ou encore, de l’Europe. Si les choix adoptés ne sont pas identiques, ils sont caractérisés par une philosophie commune : la rencontre du droit et de la responsabilité sociétale des entreprises. Alors que l’Australie a adopté deux lois en juin et novembre 2018, le Canada vient de soumettre au Parlement fédéral un ambitieux projet de loi (C-438) qui s’ajoute à un avis publié par l’Autorité des marchés financiers du Québec rappelant les obligations de divulgation des entreprises cotées. Cet article expose ces évolutions et les discussions que ces évolutions suscitent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".