La question de la sécession du Québec après lâavis consultatif de la CIJ du 22 juillet 2010 relative au Kosovo.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche aborde la question de l’avis consultatif de la CIJ sur la conformité\nau droit international de la déclaration unilatérale d’indépendance relative au Kosovo du 22\njuillet 2010 et ses possibles incidences sur la question de la sécession du Québec. Plus\nprécisément, ce mémoire traite de la migration des idées constitutionnelles au sujet des\nquestions d’autodétermination dans les cas kosovar et québécois, en effectuant une analyse\ncomparative des deux situations.\nLe présent mémoire conclut tout d’abord à un respect du droit international public par la\nCIJ dans son avis, le Kosovo remplissant les conditions de mise en oeuvre de la sécession\nremède. Néanmoins, notre recherche conduit à affirmer une impossibilité de transposition\nde solution du cas kosovar à la problématique québécoise, mais à une possible migration\ndes influences, qui assouplirait la position prise ces dernières années par le Canada,\nnotamment avec la Loi sur la clarté.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.001 |
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.
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".