MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598332341

A Primer on International Law and the "Canadian Charter"

2006· article· es· W1598332341 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lorraine Weinrib

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresumptionTreatyLawCharterPolitical scienceStatutory lawInternational lawStatutory interpretationMunicipal lawPublic lawCommon lawConstitutional lawComparative lawLegislatureLaw and economicsSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper sets out the basic structure of public international law and the issues of constitutional significance that arise in analyzing its influence upon our domestic legal system. It first defines public international law and examines its formal and informal sources. It then explains the basic framework for the domestic application of international law, which is called a reception system. It outlines the Canadian reception system, which evolved from the British model and is characterized by a constitutional separation between treaty-making and treaty-implementation between the executive and legislature. It also discusses the treaty presumption and other forms of statutory interpretation. Finally, the paper looks at the use of international law to interpret the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982 and traces several arguments that the courts use to explain this relationship. At the end of the paper, a list of “further readings” on the subject is provided.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207