{"id":"W3195113965","doi":"","title":"CASE COMMENT - COMMENTAIRE D'ARRET - THE INTERPRETATION OF BIJURAL OR HARMONIZED FEDERAL LEGISLATION: SCHREIBER V. CANADA (A.G.)","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Bar Review","topic":"Taxation and Legal Issues","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Legislation; Interpretation (philosophy); Political science; Statutory interpretation; Law; Supreme court; Philosophy; Linguistics","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000409529,0.0001400507,0.0002150469,0.00004542633,0.0005538489,0.0001934925,0.0002722891,0.00002333002,0.002174029],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000106047,0.00007685112,0.00006240909,0.0002625211,0.0000620967,0.000427148,0.00003959599,0.0001409733,0.00008150153],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000246082,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003378743,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9799416,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9983759,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990698,0.00005977692,0.0003479953,0.0001145943,0.0002004947,0.0002073235],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992191,0.00005177761,0.0002658223,0.0002925062,0.0001336445,0.00003711284],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002526547,0.00001467924,0.000656453,0.0005664562,0.0000681884,0.0001058666,0.0003214418,0.00006994833,0.000001107508,0.03445772,0.8784287,0.08528417],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002069672,0.000003264423,0.0002756043,0.0003927512,0.00006992275,0.00005271233,0.0001834587,0.002006573,0.000002958157,0.00002251591,0.9966726,0.0001107145],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01063818,0.01915913,0.00004063231,0.9253103,0.0005947702,0.00194666,0.00003986023,0.00005066532,0.04221984],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8678541,0.0002446297,0.00002450427,0.1307628,0.0002980687,0.00002899879,0.00004601118,0.00001259325,0.000728278],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8572159,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9987381,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.0369139040054882,"score_gpt":0.2618630038610211,"score_spread":0.2249490998555329,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}