MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414327447 · doi:10.7202/1119795ar

Paul-David Chouinard, Un dialogue entre le droit civil et le droit administratif : réflexions sur l’oeuvre des professeurs Pierre Issalys et Sylvio Normand

2025· article· fr· W4414327447 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul-David Chouinard

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil law (Civil law)Futures contractCommercial lawContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La parution récente des mélanges en l’honneur des professeurs émérites Pierre Issalys et Sylvio Normand permet de réfléchir sur l’oeuvre de ces deux éminents juristes. La lecture des deux ouvrages fait ressortir les nombreux liens qui unissent leur carrière respective, aux frontières du droit public et du droit privé. S’appuyant sur les différents chapitres qui composent les mélanges, l’auteur constate qu’il est possible de relever des rapprochements sur quatre plans : 1) la place importante accordée à l’histoire du droit ; 2) la reconnaissance de la spécificité des institutions juridiques québécoises ; 3) le souci de cohérence et d’ordonnancement des sources du droit ; et 4) la sensibilité aux enjeux interprétatifs découlant de la mixité du droit québécois. Cet examen offre des avenues prometteuses pour de futures recherches s’inscrivant au croisement du droit civil et du droit administratif.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicEuropean and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207