MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1840154969 · doi:10.60082/2563-8505.1093

And No More Shall We Shout: Noise By-Laws, Freedom of Expression and a Montréal Sex Club

2006· article· en· W1840154969 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Haigh, Batya Nadler

Bibliographic record

VenueSupreme Court law review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLaw in Society and Culture
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtLawJurisprudenceExpression (computer science)CommonwealthRelevance (law)Political scienceSophisticationClubSociologySocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a very popular, but incorrect, method of stating noise levels.See Part II, below, for an explanation.2 At least, I feel that there is more noise now, but this is largely impressionistic.It is not clear whether there is any objective evidence of increased noise.Despite many claims that noise is getting worse, and despite the fact that there is a very good chance that it is, there are no accurate measurements of city noise as a whole, nor are there longitudinal studies to indicate change over time.See Harris, infra, note 28.

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)0.004
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 score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.020
Scholarly communication0.0150.007
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSupreme Court law reviewSame topicLaw in Society and CultureFrench-language works237,207