MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W10626397

Protesta social y libertad de expresión en Canadá: reflexiones y lecciones del G-20 en Toronto*

2012· article· es· W10626397 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bernard Duhaime, J.-B. Poisson

Bibliographic record

VenueDerecho Comparado de la Información · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesLimitingDemocracyContext (archaeology)Political sciencePersonaCartographyHuman rightsGeographyLawArtPoliticsEngineeringArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

espanolEl presente articulo exhibe las violaciones a la libertad de expresion que sucedieron durante y despues de la Cumbre del G-20 en Toronto, Canada en junio de 2010. Los autores analiza el contexto y los hechos concernientes a los arrestos y detenciones de mas de mil personas que se manifestaban publicamente. Tales sucesos significaron el incumpli - miento tanto de normas canadienses como de las obligaciones interna - cionales del pais. Los autores concluyen enfatizando la interdependen - cia de los derechos humanos y resaltan los posibles impactos de las limitaciones a la contestacion social en el futuro de la democracia EnglishIn this article the authors present the violations of freedom of speech that occurred during and following the G20 Summit in Toronto, Canada in June 2010. The authors analyze the context and facts surrounding the arrests and detentions of more than a thousand citizens in a large pro - test. Such facts infringed Canadian law as well as Canada�s international obligations. The authors conclude by emphasizing the interdependence of human rights and the underlying impacts of limiting social voice on democracy

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDerecho Comparado de la InformaciónSame topicComparative constitutional jurisprudence studiesFrench-language works237,207