Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article aborde le degré de protection en matière de vie privée accordé au courrier électronique par les tribunaux nord-américains. L’auteur dresse un portrait général de la jurisprudence canadienne et américaine actuellement disponible en la matière, en concentrant ses propos sur l’expectative de vie privée des employés ainsi que sur les droits de l’employeur d’accéder à leurs courriels dans un contexte de relations de travail. Alors que les tribunaux canadiens abordent la problématique en procédant par analogie, c’est-à-dire par comparaison du courriel avec des modes de communication plus traditionnels (i.e. le téléphone et le courrier), les tribunaux américains font une analyse interprétative du 4ème amendement de la constitution des États-Unis et des droits statutaires accordés par l’Electronic Communications Privacy Act de 1986 et le Privacy Protection Act de 1986. L’auteur précise que les dispositions législatives actuelles présentent d’importantes lacunes rendant difficile leur application aux courriels.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".