MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527035681

CONSTITUTIONAL PRECEDENTS IN JAPAN: A COMMENT ON THE ROLE OF PRECEDENT

2011· article· en· W1527035681 on OpenAlexaff
Shigenori Matsui

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtLawPolitical scienceAdjudicationOriginal jurisdictionPrecedentStatuteMajority opinionJudicial independenceDe facto
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Article, the author comments on the views of Professor Hiroshi Itoh about the approach of the Japanese Supreme Court towards constitutional precedents. He stresses the importance of precedents in the constitutional adjudication which creates constraints in the judicial decision-making. He outlines the role of precedents in the “Tsu City Ground-breaking Ceremony Case.”

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.019
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0160.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis)Same topicJudicial and Constitutional StudiesFrench-language works237,207