MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413244056 · doi:10.3138/ccar.v16i1.005

L’accès À la Justice Pour les Personnes Vulnérables par la Voie de L’action Collective en Droit Québécois

2020· article· en· W4413244056 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pierre-Claude Lafond

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Class Action Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass actionEconomic JusticeAction (physics)Context (archaeology)Political scienceDamagesCollateralSettlement (finance)Compensation (psychology)Vulnerability (computing)CriminologyLawSociologyPsychologySocial psychologyBusinessGeographyComputer securityState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Class action, traditionally used in the areas of consumer protection, competition, securities, civil liability, and environment, is also an appropriate and effective procedural avenue in the defence of vulnerable people’s rights. Case law provides many compelling examples of actions on behalf of survivors of sexual abuse, health care recipients, or marginalized persons in situations of vulnerability. Not only have these actions been overwhelmingly authorized or accepted by courts in Quebec and in Canada, but it can be noted that judges have tried to adapt the procedural and evidentiary rules to their context in favour of the group members. Victorious after numerous out-of-court settlements, these actions provided substantial compensation to the victims. As a true path to justice for those who would otherwise have no voice, class action is an accessible and effective procedural means, despite the limitations and the collateral effects it can cause.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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