Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Judicial review is often thought to be an absolute veto, killing legislation with no hope of resurrection. The adoption of review, therefore, is understood to be a potentially severe qualification to democratic government. It was this understanding that once drove American progressives such as Theodore Roosevelt to endorse judicial recall that would have allowed the people to rule by overriding constitutional doctrine;' that led Canada to include notwithstanding clause in its Charter, shielding legislation from nullification;2 and that now spurs some to urge remaining Westminster systems to resist pressures to curb parliamentary sovereignty with review. But how warranted is this assumption? Creative and persistent legislators will try to reanimate these statutory corpses, and it is an open question whether disapproval really lays issue to rest. Congress is sometimes quick to try to resuscitate at federal level what Court strikes down at state level. Often these legislative exertions are serious only as political theater. The Flag Protection Act of 19894 and Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003' come to
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 it