MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7104443311 · doi:10.71781/19717

L’équité et le droit : étude herméneutique d’une notion fondamentale du raisonnement judiciaire et de son intégration dans l’éthos du juge

2023· dissertation· fr· W7104443311 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal Systems and Institutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceMeaning (existential)Context (archaeology)Subject (documents)Interpretation (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’équité est un concept large dont la signification et la richesse conceptuelle ont évolué temporellement au sein de la théorie du droit et de la théorie politique. Au travers d’une histoire de l’équité, partant de la conception d’Aristote jusqu’aux juristes réalistes américains, ce mémoire analyse et explique la transformation graduelle de ce concept dans le droit, dont la place fut tantôt au centre des réflexions autour de la justice, tantôt minimisée, voire écartée, mais jamais complètement supprimée. Nous fondant sur cette riche histoire de l’équité, nous reconnectons ce concept phare de la théorie du droit à une réception de celui-ci au sein de la théorie politique. Pour ce faire, nous mobilisons la théorie de la liberté comme non-domination de Philip Pettit comme le cadre d’une pratique contemporaine de l’équité, au travers de la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême du Canada sur l’équité procédurale.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.054
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)Same topicLegal Systems and InstitutionsFrench-language works237,207