MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404483435 · doi:10.7202/1114584ar

Naître ou ne pas être. Temps et contretemps de la maxime <i>infans conceptus</i>

2024· article· fr· W4404483435 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gaële Gidrol-Mistral, Michaël Lessard

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptusHumanitiesPhilosophyBiologyPregnancyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’enfant conçu mais non encore né est un objet élusif que le droit civil peine à saisir. Dans une enquête publiée en 2013, consacrée à la construction par la doctrine du statut juridique de l’embryon humain à travers la maxime infans conceptus, Gaële Gidrol-Mistral et Anne Saris ont mis en lumière une pluralité de perspectives doctrinales qui rejaillissent sur le statut de l’enfant conçu. Leur étude révèle une doctrine qui oscille entre lui attribuer le statut de chose ou de personne. À l’heure où les technologies procréatives ne cessent de se développer, que la grossesse pour autrui prend place dans le Code civil du Québec et que les débats politiques sur l’avortement se ravivent, comprendre le berceau doctrinal de ces enjeux devient nécessaire. Partant de cette enquête, le présent article retrace chacune des perspectives doctrinales pour les confronter aux situations de l’utérus artificiel, de l’enfant mort-né et de la grossesse pour autrui.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.025
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droit→Same topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research→French-language works237,207→