Les impacts constitutionnels et politiques du renvoi relatif a la secession du Quebec /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Un autre essai sur la sempiternelle question de l'unite canadienne, deplorez-vous presentement. Pis encore, ajoutez-vous, on y aborde une fois de plus l'ennuyeuse et l'ennuyante problematique constitutionnelle. Et pourquoi l'auteur a-t-il choisi un tel sujet? Parce qu'il fait partie de la race des fatigants mais infatigables maniaques de cet incessant debat qu'est celui des Deux Solitudes? Possible. Surement meme. Mais il y a plus: le Renvoi relatif a la secession du Quebec ne represente pas qu'un simple episode de la saga constitutionnelle canadienne. Vraisemblablement, ces implications pratiques pourraient un jour sceller l'issue du debat. Certes, le mouvement separatiste quebecois, loin d'etre moribond, ne s'eteindra pas sur la seule base d'une decision de la Cour supreme du Canada. Pretendre le contraire releve de la fantaisie, de l'outrecuidance ou encore, d'un manque tangible de pragmatisme politique. Toutefois, un fait persiste: applique in extenso, l'Avis s'avere une serieuse embuche sur le chemin menant a l'independance. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 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".