MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1550906034

Litigating Family Law Economically: The Case Study of My Support Calculator, and Lessons for the Civil Litigation Bar

2012· article· en· W1550906034 on OpenAlexaffabout
Omar Ha-Redeye

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalculatorBridge (graph theory)Public supportCivil procedureChild supportRepresentation (politics)LawFamily lawPolitical scienceLegal serviceBusinessPublic administrationComputer scienceMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Family law in Ontario is in crisis, due to the high costs of litigation and high number of self-represented parties. My Support Calculator is the only site in Canada that provides free and accurate child support and spousal support calculations. Providing this information to the public through legal technology could help with the burden on the court system and on litigants who are represented but end up bearing the expenses of resolving these issues on behalf of both parties. Educating the public of the complexities of family law, including support calculations, may help recapture the self-represented market through the provision of unbundled services. Similar strategies employed in other areas of litigation could also help bridge the divide between the bar and some members of the public who have resisted securing representation.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0460.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designCase report
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 venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicLegal Education and Practice Innovations→French-language works237,207→