MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051730828 · doi:10.1080/13642980500032180

Pushing under-18s onto the street: a Canadian charter analysis of Ontario's welfare-to-work scheme

2005· article· en· W2051730828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sonja C. Grover

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Human Rights · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterDenialMinor (academic)LawPolitical scienceFiduciaryDutySocial workState (computer science)Intervention (counseling)Work (physics)PsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario's social assistance program involves an unconstitutional denial of social assistance to most applicants under 18. The exception involves those who can prove special circumstances involving withdrawal from parental control due to no fault of their own such as due to child abuse. Ontario also unconstitutionally denies protective services to 16 and 17 year olds with some exceptions. In addition, parental support obligations to minors aged 16–17 are ended should the youth withdraw from parental control under any circumstance. It is argued that the state's fiduciary duty to the minor compels state intervention in the protection of the minor's Charter security of the person and equality rights.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Human RightsSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207