MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990719429 · doi:10.1353/tlj.2007.0013

Frank Iacobucci and the University of Toronto

2007· article· en· W1990719429 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Martin L. Friedland

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Law Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionsFriendshipCharacter (mathematics)Media studiesSociologyLawPolitical scienceArtSocial scienceLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frank Iacobucci and the University of Toronto† Martin L. Friedland (bio) My essay is about one of Frank Iacobucci's great passions, the University of Toronto, where he spent almost twenty years of his life. Frank had a high regard for universities. The first sentence in the introduction to the 2005 book Taking Public Universities Seriously, which he edited with Carolyn Tuohy, reads, 'Public universities are central pillars of successful societies.'1 My objective in this brief paper on Frank and the university is to help us gain a better understanding of his character and his approach to problem solving so that we can more easily understand why he was so successful as a judge and continues to be so effective as a problem solver. I know Frank well. I first met him in September 1962 when I was teaching at Osgoode Hall Law School and he was on his way to Cambridge University, where I had spent the year 1960/1961 and to which I would be returning for another nine months in early January 1963. As with almost everyone who has met Frank, there was an instant bond. Our friendship has lasted almost forty-five years. During that time I have never heard anyone say a harsh word about him. As fellow Canadians doing graduate work in law at Cambridge – I think we were the only two doing so in 1963 – we cemented the friendship. I became aware of Frank's fine sense of humour and his laughter, which is also part of the reason for his success. I remember one incident – I can't remember whether I was actually there or whether Frank told me about it – when he and a philosopher friend of ours were in one of the Great Courts of St. John's College. Our friend had said something funny to Frank, who had doubled over in laughter and was rolling on the grass. The hall porter came over to our philosopher friend and asked what [End Page 155] was happening. The reply was, 'He just got some bad news – but he's taking it well.' Frank's humour was well known at the law school. You could always count on Frank to break the tension – or boredom – at a faculty council meeting by saying something clever and humorous. Sometimes it was straight slapstick. Frank always got a laugh at marks meetings, when we came to the student who had been given the pseudonym 'Duck,' by ducking under the table. I doubt if he resorted to slapstick or rolled on the floor in conference at the Supreme Court, but I can picture him switching to his Groucho Marx or W.C. Fields voice when the situation needed such an intervention. Frank went to Cambridge on a Newton Rowell Fellowship – the very Rowell of the law school's Rowell Room. Rowell had been the leader of the Liberal Party in Ontario. In his second year at Cambridge, Frank had the Mackenzie King Travelling Scholarship. I doubt if Brian Mulroney knew of this early identification with the Liberal Party when he appointed Frank Chief Justice of the Federal Court. His work at Cambridge was in international law, with a particular interest in disarmament, which again was useful in his later negotiations with the faculty association. Disarming the opposition has been one of his strengths. Cambridge is also the place where Frank met his lifelong partner, Nancy Eastham, who came from a well-established New England family. Like her father, Nancy had been at Harvard Law School, where she was one of the editors of the Harvard Law Review. My wife, Judy, became friends with Nancy. We attended Frank and Nancy's wedding in Andover, Massachusetts, in October 1964, trying to do our bit to counterbalance the profusion of Bostonians. After Cambridge, Frank and Nancy went to New York, where Frank was an associate of Dewey, Ballantine. I seem to recall that Frank has a funny story about meeting or not meeting Governor Dewey. Sometime in early 1967, Peter Williamson, who taught corporate and securities law, decided to leave the University of Toronto Law School to return to the Dartmouth business school. The law school therefore needed...

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.008

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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Law JournalSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207