MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1598261752

What Is Access to Justice

2005· article· en· W1598261752 on OpenAlexaffabout
Constance Backhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacializationEconomic JusticeIdentity (music)Political scienceImmigrationCriminologyPoliticsIdentity politicsPopulationRace (biology)Compensation (psychology)Gender studiesSociologyLawSocial psychologyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author explores how Aboriginality, racialization, gender, disability, class, and sexual identity may affect one's ability to obtain justice in the Canadian legal system. The Canadian justice system has historically given disproportionate access to white, non-immigrant, able-bodied, affluent men while marginalizing others. Today, Canadians would prefer to forget our history of discriminatory laws and practices, impeding compensation and change that would benefit marginalized groups. As a result, historically marginalized groups have less access to knowledge and power in our justice system, and continue to be underrepresented in politics, in the legal profession, and in the judiciary. The article suggests mechanisms to make our legal system more representative of Canada's population.

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)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.012
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicLegal Education and Practice Innovations→French-language works237,207→