Prévenir ou créer le crime? : une enquête sur le dilemme au cœur de la doctrine de la provocation policière
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce mémoire s’intéresse aux conditions historiques qui ont mené à l’édification judiciaire de la doctrine de la provocation policière d’abord aux États-Unis, puis au Canada. Dans un système de droit criminel aux visées préventives, il identifie le risque de la création étatique du crime comme le problème au cœur de cette doctrine. À la lumière de ce constat, l’auteur met ensuite le droit canadien en examen. En s’intéressant plus particulièrement à deux facettes du cadre d’analyse développé par la Cour suprême du Canada, il remarque la relative indifférence du droit à l’égard du « problème », et ce, en dépit d’un discours judiciaire rassurant, mais trompeur et teinté par un désir prépondérant de contrôle du crime. Cette découverte le conduit à mettre en doute la capacité exclusive des tribunaux à répondre aux enjeux sociaux complexes émanant de la doctrine de la provocation policière.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".