L’éboulement rocheux du 19 septembre 1889 à Québec et l’enjeu de responsabilité dans le cas d’une catastrophe naturelle1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’enquête du coroner qui survient à la suite de l’éboulement rocheux dans le cap Diamant à Québec le 19 septembre 1889 entraîne une remise en question de la notion de responsabilité gouvernementale face aux catastrophes naturelles. Le conflit politique et judiciaire qui s’ensuit met en lumière les limites de la responsabilité juridique de l’État dans de telles catastrophes. Alors que les habitants du secteur utilisent l’enquête pour légitimer leurs inquiétudes concernant la sécurité de la falaise, les autorités municipales tentent sans succès de blâmer le gouvernement fédéral, mais forcent tout de même ce dernier à instaurer une commission royale d’enquête pour dédommager les victimes et à mettre en place des mesures de stabilisation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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".