MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1896008557 · doi:10.1017/s0731126500011914

Ignorance of International Law Is No Excuse, or How the Florida Legislature Ticked Off Canada†

2013· article· en· W1896008557 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patricia Morgan, Loren Turner, Edward T. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Legal Information · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatuteLegislatureLawLicensePolitical scienceIgnorancePossession (linguistics)ExcuseStatute of limitationsResidenceBusinessSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During its 2012 session the Florida Legislature amended the text of the Florida Statutes which lists exemptions from the requirements of obtaining a Florida drivers’ license. Removed from the text of Florida Statute 322.04 was the line concerning nonresidents, both fellow Americans and international visitors, “who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver's license issued to the nonresident in his or her home state or country [emphasis added].” Inserted was a new line, “An International Driving Permit issued in his or her name in his or her country of residence and a valid license issued in that country.” International visitors were required to have in their possession not only a valid drivers’ license, but also an International Driving Permit (IDP) that translated into English the personal identification information of the driver. The change took effect January 1, 2013, but even before that date, Florida faced allegations that it was violating international law with this new requirement.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Legal InformationSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207