MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377834951 · doi:10.7202/1099219ar

Le consentement préalable, libre et éclairé (CPLE) en contexte canadien

2023· article· fr· W4377834951 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Martín Papillon, Thierry Rodon

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers du CIÉRA · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La DNUDPA innove en matière de protection des territoires autochtones en consacrant le principe de consentement préalable, libre et éclairé (CPLE). La portée des dispositions de la Déclaration portant sur le CPLE reste cependant sujette à débats. Alors que les peuples autochtones y voient une obligation ferme d’obtenir leur consentement, plusieurs États hésitent à renoncer à leur pouvoir décisionnel, notamment en matière d’aménagement et de développement territorial. Au Canada, la mise en oeuvre du CPLE reste pour l’instant bien ancrée dans la continuité des principes énoncés par les tribunaux canadiens concernant l’obligation de consulter.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers du CIÉRASame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207