Gouverner les religions au Canada par des innovations juridiques made in USA : la réflexivité à l’œuvre dans l’accommodement raisonnable et la liberté de religion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les droits en matière religieuse sont fondés sur le libéralisme politique qui a récemment évolué vers un constitutionnalisme pluraliste. Cette évolution a permis l’émergence d’une plus grande prise en compte de la réflexivité dans la gouvernance des religions au Canada, laquelle fait appel aux destinataires de la norme dans la construction de celle-ci en fonction du contexte. Le droit de la gouvernance se distinguant par l’usage innovant des normes et la transformation des comportements de la part des acteurs, c’est précisément à des innovations juridiques créées en droit américain que la Cour suprême du Canada s’en est remise, plus particulièrement aux mécanismes réflexifs que sont l’obligation d’accommodement raisonnable et la conception subjective de la liberté de religion.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".