MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157155610 · doi:10.4000/rdr.1453

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

2021· article· fr· W3157155610 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stéphane Bernatchez

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue du droit des religions · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.279
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue du droit des religionsSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207