Bibliographic record
Abstract
ARTICLES Jasreet Badyal, Perry v Schwarzenegger : An Opportunity to “Do” Law Differently Katie Duke, Ownership of Rainwater and the Legality of Rainwater Harvesting in British Columbia Chris Durrant, “None of that Paper Stuff Works”: A Critique of the Legal System’s Efforts to End Domestic Assault in Nunavut Lisa Grantham, Bill C-14: A Step Backwards for the Rights of Mentally Disordered Offenders in the Canadian Criminal Justice System Bethany Hastie & Alison Yule, Milestone or Missed Opportunity? A Critical Analysis of the Impact of Domotor on the Future of Human Trafficking Cases in Canada Louise Mimnagh, Probate Actions and “Suspicious Circumstances”: A Third Standard of Proof for Allegations Involving Moral Guilt Benjamin Oliphant, Interpreting the Charter with International Law: Pitfalls and Principles Kirsten Snell, Can Water be a Human Right? CASE COMMENTARY Dana Phillips, The Prude in the Law: Why the Polygamy Reference Is All About Sex
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.576 | 0.392 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".