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
This article reviews the different theories of law and culture, and defines the concept and breadth of legal culture. It also discusses the relationship between law and culture, referring to the existing literature on the subject. Furthermore, it discusses how authors have connected culture to civil procedure, and why the concept of “modern legal culture” is important in the context of class action law. Its main thesis is the cultural construction of class action law. Indeed, the class action encourages the transmission of culture and the history of the North American class action was influenced by culture. The class action also mirrors society's structure and culture, in light of the following three characteristics of North American contemporary culture: access to justice, managerial judging and the preference for settlements. Class actions correspondingly affect North American legal culture, as evidenced by changes in the legal institutions, in the role of judges and in the legal profession. Finally, in this article it is argued that the cross-constitutive relationship between class action law and culture must be studied both theoretically and empirically. Ultimately, this article seeks to demonstrate that the class action is a disputing institution that is culturally constructed, that plays a role in the construction and transmission of culture-that is, of social arrangements, systems of beliefs and values.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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