Article court : Le comportement non verbal lors de procès devrait-il être ignoré?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Canada, la Cour suprême du Canada reconnait l’importance de la communication non verbale lors de procès, tant pour l’évaluation de la crédibilité que pour le contre-interrogatoire. Toutefois, en pratique, la popularité de croyances non fondées et démontrées fausses soulève des questions quant à l’usage de du comportement non verbal lors de procès. Devant un tel constat, le comportement non verbal lors de procès devrait-il être ignorée? Pour répondre à cette question, dans un premier temps, un retour sur les fonctions du comportement non verbal sera effectué et, dans un deuxième temps, les arguments contre l’usage du comportement non verbal seront résumés. Cet article court se termine par un appel à apprécier à sa juste valeur le comportement non verbal des témoins lors de procès.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".