Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présente étude porte sur les réformes de la justice civile en cours au Québec telles qu’elles ont été élaborées en 2018 et en 2019 dans les plans du ministère de la Justice. Elles reposent sur des fondements externes au droit : la logique managériale, l’innovation et l’utilisation accrue des technologies de l’information et des communications (TIC). La rhétorique qui sous-tend les réformes juridiques compte. Elle leur imprime une teneur précise qui touche tant les modalités que les finalités de la justice. Ainsi, la volonté affirmée du ministère de la Justice de favoriser l’accès à la justice se trouve partiellement démentie. En outre, les réformes comportent le risque d’une « déspécification » de la justice. Depuis le mois de mars 2020, la pandémie de COVID-19 exerce une forte contrainte sur la mise en oeuvre des réformes. À l’instar de ce qui se produit dans d’autres juridictions, les cours relèvent maints défis et développent progressivement de nécessaires balises à l’usage des TIC.
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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".