MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413243843 · doi:10.3138/ccar.v17i2.157

Une Proposition Plus Modeste: Soumissions Bilingues Au Minister de la Justice de Québec Dans the Cadre de Réformes Possible au Régime D’Action Collective

2022· article· fr· W4413243843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Class Action Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceTribunalPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé: En 2019, à la suite d’une demande du ministère de la Justice du Québec, la professeure Catherine Piché du Laboratoire sur les actions collectives de l’Université de Montréal, une juriste distinguée, a publié un rapport étoffé sur l’action collective québécoise. Entre autres, ce rapport aborde la proportionnalité, l’autorisation et les honoraires d’avocats en demande. Les soumissions qui suivent sont celles déposées par les auteurs. Ces derniers recommandent que plus de discrétion soit accordée au tribunal pour suspendre ou rejeter des actions collectives à l’étape de la préautorisation, que soit renforcé (plutôt qu’élagué) le deuxième critère de l’article 575 du Code de procédure civile, que soit envisagée de façon différente l’appréciation du risque lors de l’octroi d’honoraires extrajudiciaires et que soit écartée la règle controversée du « premier à déposer » en faveur d’une analyse accélérée de demandes d’autorisation parallèles.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Class Action ReviewSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207