MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855830533

Dispute over autism treatment heads to top court

2003· article· en· W1855830533 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heather Kent

Bibliographic record

VenueEurope PMC (PubMed Central) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppealCharterSupreme courtLawHigh CourtPolitical scienceRemand (court procedure)Law of the caseAutismMedicineCourt of recordOriginal jurisdictionPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

British Columbia's long-running legal dispute with parents of autistic children will be resolved in the Supreme Court of Canada. In 2000, the BC Court of Appeal upheld an earlier ruling that found the province had violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by denying treatment that was

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0370.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0170.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurope PMC (PubMed Central)Same topicLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesFrench-language works237,207