MétaCan
ENFR
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

Export CSVExport JSONAPI query

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
→
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Legal Theory
Topic
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

26 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20062025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
26 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 1 of 1

Labels cover 0 of 26 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 26 of 26 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affunlabeled
LEGAL POWERS IN PRIVATE LAW
Christopher Essert
2015· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
42
citations
affunlabeled
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR HATEFUL SPEECH
Evan Simpson
2006· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
20
citations
affunlabeled
LOCKEAN PROPERTY AND LITERARY WORKS
Jonathan Peterson
2008· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
14
citations
affunlabeled
LEGAL OBLIGATION AND REASONS
Christopher Essert
2013· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
12
citations
affunlabeled
PROPERTY AND THE RULE OF LAW
Lisa M. Austin
2014· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
9
citations
affunlabeled
WORKING AS EQUAL MORAL AGENTS
Sabine Tsuruda
2020· article· en· Legal Theory· Business, Management and Accounting
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
5
citations
affunlabeled
COLLECTIVE ACTION AND CONTRACT RIGHTS
Louis‐Philippe Hodgson
2011· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
4
citations
affunlabeled
GROUNDING PROCEDURAL RIGHTS
N. P. Adams
2019· article· en· Legal Theory· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
4
citations
affunlabeled
PROCEDURAL RIGHTS AND FACTUAL ACCURACY
Hamish Stewart
2020· article· en· Legal Theory· Economics, Econometrics and Finance
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
2
citations
affunlabeled
EXPLAINING COMPENSATORY DUTIES
Matthew S. Bedke
2010· article· en· Legal Theory· Neuroscience
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations
affunlabeled
HYPERLEXIS AND THE RULE OF LAW
Vincent Chiao
2021· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1
citations
affunlabeled
Youth as Moral Opportunity
Benjamin Ewing
2025· article· en· Legal Theory· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About