MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542187664 · doi:10.59962/9780774855938

Multiculturalism and the Canadian Constitution

2008· book· en· W1542187664 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2008
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismConstitutionGenealogyPolitical scienceSociologyLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has often been cited internationally for its success as a multicultural society and for its ability to manage this diversity through a federal constitution. The strands of diversity include the constitutional relationship between English and French Canada, federalism more generally, the status of Aboriginal peoples, Canada’s immigration and integration strategies, affirmative action, and a general guarantee of equal protection for men and women. Together they tell a complex story of pluralism, consolidated through a long and incremental period of constitution-building. Multiculturalism and the Canadian Constitution brings together scholars of cultural diversity from backgrounds in law, political science, and history to address key components of the changing Canadian story: the evolution over time of multiculturalism within Canadian constitutional law and policy; the territorial dimension of Canadian federalism; and the role of constitutional interpretation by the courts in the development of Canada as a multicultural state. Wide-ranging and provocative, the essays illustrate how deeply multiculturalism is woven into the fabric of the Canadian constitution and the everyday lives of Canadians.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0250.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations36
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooksSame topicEuropean and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207