Revue de droit. Université de Sherbrooke. Volume 32 - Numéro 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
thérapeutique 253 du plaideur trop belliqueux 1.Il s'agit, spécifiquement, du droit d'ester (ou d'agir) en justice. 2.Je reviens ici sur une question que j'avais commencé à approfondir il y a déjà une quinzaine d'années : voir Y.-M.Morissette, «L'initiative judiciaire vouée à l'échec et la responsabilité de l'avocat ou de son mandant» (1984) 44 R. du B. 397.Outre qu'il est difficile de résister à la tentation de se citer soi-même, je signale cette ancienne parution pour mettre cartes sur table : en effet, comme la thèse que j'y avançais me paraît aussi valable aujourd'hui, je m'en inspire dans les lignes qui suivent.La démonstration est cependant plus soutenue dans cet article de 65 pages qu'elle ne peut l'être ici.thérapeutique (2002) 32 R.D.U.S. du plaideur trop belliqueux 3.Ces définitions sont tirées respectivement du Nouveau Petit Robert, 1990 et du Dictionnaire Hachette de la langue française.M. W. Rowlands, dans l'article «Psychiatric and Legal Aspects of Persistent Litigation» (1988) 157 British J. Psy 317, a proposé la définition suivante, reprise plus tard par G. S. Ungvari, A. H. T. Pang, C. K. Wong, «Querulous Behaviour» (1997) 37 Medicine Science and the Law 265 [ci-après Querulous Behaviour] : «...an overvalued idea of having been wronged, that dominates the mental life, and results in behaviour directed to the attainment of justice, and which causes significant problems in the individual's social and personal life.It usually, but not always, involves petitioning in the courts or other agencies of administration».4.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.520 | 0.214 |
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".