MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2039981008 · doi:10.1353/tlj.2007.0014

Proportionality in Canadian and German Constitutional Jurisprudence

2007· article· en· W2039981008 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Dieter Grimm

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Law Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJudicial and Constitutional Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceProportionality (law)GermanPolitical scienceLawConstitutional courtConstitutional lawPhilosophyConstitutionLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kanada Hak ve Özgürlükler Beyannamesi 1 yürürlüğe gireli dört yıldan fazla olmamıştı ki Kanada Yüksek Mahkemesi 1. maddedeki sınırlama hükmünün nasıl yorumlanacağı sorusunun cevabını en sonunda buldu.Cevap, R.-Oakes 2 davasında kısaca şöyleydi: kanunilik ve ölçülülük.3 İlk unsur olan kanunilik 1. maddede açıkça belirtilmişken ("kanun ile öngörülmüş olma") ikinci unsur ölçülülük, "özgür ve demokratik bir toplumda açıkça haklı görülen makul sınırlar[...]" ifadesinin özgün bir yorumu olarak görünmektedir.Pek çok doktrinsel yenilik nihai şekline zamanla gelişerek ulaşsa da, Başyargıç Dickson mütalaasında ölçülülüğün şartları için * Bu makalenin orijinali "Proportionality in Canadian and German Constitutional Jurisprudence" başlığı ile University of Toronto Law Journal Vol.57, Issue 2 (Spring 2007)'da yayınlanmıştır.

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)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0170.023
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations222
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Law Journal→Same topicJudicial and Constitutional Studies→French-language works237,207→