MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161959543 · doi:10.82308/45928

Le droit de la filiation entre ciel et terre : étude du discours juridique québécois

2007· dissertation· fr· W7161959543 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie-France Bureau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSketchContext (archaeology)Interpretation (philosophy)Natural (archaeology)Field (mathematics)Order (exchange)Period (music)Subjectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis submitted undertakes an analysis of legal discourse in Quebec filiation Law. In particular, the author seeks to understand why this field---in marked contrast to other sectors of the civil law---continues to be influenced by natural law theories. The principle focus of the study is the period from 1980 to the present. The discourse analysis approach helps to shed light on the considerable number of reforms which took place in a relatively short period of time and gives context to contemporary interrogations of the foundations of the Law of filiation. Given that many scholars are now questioning the incoherence of the current norms, and deploring the alteration of this field of law, it is important to sketch a picture of the larger influences and values which nonetheless present continuity in the civilian tradition. From a constructivist point of view, the author's contribution to this field is to systematize the thought and vision of the scholars involved in this area of law in order to identify the various influences on them, and the range of ideas and disciplines which they invoke in justifying their theoretical vision. Filiation has been described, in different periods, as revealing a divine order, as representing the core unit of society in the national image, as translating into law a set of natural facts or as an immutable anthropological order which secures the psychological balance of subjects. This analysis of the dominant discourse suggests that the rules of filiation have, throughout, been seen to represent a transcendent order, one superior to positive law.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseFrench-language works237,207