MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037622326 · doi:10.7202/028942ar

The Legality of Picketing

2005· article· en· W2037622326 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Suzanne Handman, John Leopold

Bibliographic record

VenueRelations industrielles · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEnergy Law and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPicketingPrinciple of legalityJurisprudenceContext (archaeology)Subject (documents)Political scienceLawObject (grammar)SociologyComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors attempt, by means of « jurisprudence » to determine the conditions and circumstances which render picketing legal or illegal. Within this context, picketing will be examined from the point of view of object, form and occasion. In addition, the sanction of picketing will be presented, followed by a critique of the subject.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.046
Scholarly communication0.0150.011
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRelations industriellesSame topicEnergy Law and PolicyFrench-language works237,207