Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’aide médicale à mourir est législativement encadrée au Canada par le Code criminel et, au Québec, par la Loi concernant les soins de fin de vie. Après avoir mis en lumière les similarités de ces deux lois et leurs différences, l’auteure présente, dans ses grandes lignes, la décision de la Cour supérieure du Québec dans l’affaire Truchon c. Procureur général du Canada, qui a conclu à l’inconstitutionnalité des exigences de « fin de vie » et de « mort naturelle raisonnablement prévisible » respectivement prévues par le Code criminel et par la Loi provinciale. Constatant que la mort est devenue plus « accessible », l’auteure explore le potentiel de l’intelligence artificielle pour aider les professionnelles et les professionnels de la santé à avoir une communication de qualité avec une personne affligée d’une maladie grave et incurable quant à ses options de soins et à sa fin de vie.
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 | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".