MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210450248

Le droit constitutionnel comme vecteur de transformation sociale. Le cas de la conjugalité au Canada (Constitutional Law as a Vector of Social Change. The Case of Conjugality in Canada)

2019· article· fr· W3210450248 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean-François Gaudreault-DesBiens

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French Abstract: Dans les societes occidentales hypermodernes, c’est-a-dire caracterisees par une modernite radicale et exacerbee, la transformation des codes sociaux et la perte d’autorite de nombreuses institutions ayant traditionnellement regule le champ de la morale ont modifie les representations de la conjugalite. Le droit tantot a pris acte de ces changements, tantot les a impulses. C’est precisement le type de role qu’a joue le droit constitutionnel canadien depuis son enchâssement, a partir de 1982, du principe du constitutionnalisme comme pierre d’assise de l’ordre juridique canadien. Dans cette foulee, la nature et les consequences du lien conjugal ont ete redefinies au nom de droits a l’egalite eriges au rang de droits fondamentaux justiciables devant les tribunaux de droit commun dans le cadre d’un processus de controle concret et a posteriori de la constitutionnalite des lois. Nous brosserons dans ce texte un tableau de ce processus de redefinition, qui demeure encore inacheve et qui souleve d’importantes questions ayant trait a l’economie des rapports entre les pouvoirs judiciaires et legislatifs. Nous le ferons d’abord en evoquant certaines evolutions de la conjugalite – etape incontournable afin de demontrer l’insuffisance de la conception juridique traditionnelle de la conjugalite face aux evolutions de ce phenomene et, partant, l’impulsion sociale a modifier cette conception4 – (chapitre I), puis, revenant au Canada, en precisant les parametres de l’interpretation donnee aux droits a l’egalite (chapitre II). Nous verrons ensuite comment ces droits ont influe sur la reconnaissance d’une pluralite de formes de conjugalite (chapitre III). L’on constatera, au final, que le droit constitutionnel a indeniablement participe a l’elargissement du concept juridique de conjugalite au Canada. English Abstract: This article examines the processes under which the nature and consequences of conjugality have been redefined, and pluralized, in the name of equality rights in Canada. These processes have raised important questions pertaining to the relationship between judicial and legislative powers, and have revealed both a disconnect between traditional conceptions of conjugality and contemporary social practices, and the importance of law, and constitutional law in particular as a vector of social change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.038
Scholarly communication0.0110.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207