MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214419968 · doi:10.4000/rdctss.862

Tattoos on bodies and bodies fit for work: state of the jurisprudence in Quebec

2020· article· fr· W3214419968 on OpenAlexaffabout
Urwana Coiquaud

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de droit comparé du travail et de la sécurité sociale · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTattoo and Body Piercing Complications
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of MontréalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudencePhenomenonState (computer science)Context (archaeology)Work (physics)LawPolitical scienceSociologyCriminologyHistoryEpistemologyEngineeringPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tattooing has crossed the borders of the underworld to reach into all spheres of society and allows everyone to express their individuality. If this phenomenon has become relatively commonplace and accepted in our societies, particularly in Canada, what about in the work context? What are the regulatory guarantees granted to the tattooed employee? Can the employer impose rules surrounding the wearing of tattoos? If so, to what extent can he or she compel the employee to do so? After outlining the protective regulatory framework of one of its provinces, Quebec, we will examine their treatment by the courts.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de droit comparé du travail et de la sécurité socialeSame topicTattoo and Body Piercing ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207