More Than an Empty Gesture: Enabling Women with Mental Disabilities to Testify on a Promise to Tell the Truth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le présent article, les auteures se servent de la récente décision de la Cour suprême du Canada dans l'arrêt R. c DAI pour examiner la question de la compétence des femmes ayant une incapacité mentale à témoigner dans des causes d'agression sexuelle. Les auteures appuient la décision majoritaire de la Cour, mais elles remettent en question certains motifs, notamment le fait qu'on assimile les femmes avec une incapacité mentale à des enfants. Les auteures étudient quels types de questions sont désormais appropriées dans une enquête sur la compétence et se demandent s'il est pertinent, dans ce genre d'enquête, de recourir à des témoins non spécialisés et à des témoins experts. Elles soutiennent que le témoignage des femmes capables de communiquer est une étape de plus pour aider l'appareil judiciaire criminel à répondre au taux élevé d'agressions sexuelles contre des femmes ayant des incapacités mentales.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
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".