MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052405846 · doi:10.7202/043417ar

Quebec, Canada, and the Glorious Revolution

2005· article· en· W2052405846 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
John Remington Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de droit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionSecessionLegitimacySpanish Civil WarLawReignPatriotismPolitical scienceOrder (exchange)HistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory of secession in the United States, as acknowleged by New England during the War of 1812 and by the South during the American Civil War, is traced to authentic historical roots, and freshly reexpounded so as to permit renewed consideration of the wisdom of James Buchanan and the error of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and 1861. The British North America Act of 1867 (Constitution Act of 1867) is then viewed against Sir John Macdonald's misinterpretation of the American Civil War. Events leading to the present constitutional impasse between Quebec and Canada are reexamined, so as to reveal the underlying cause. The author expounds the principle of the Glorious Revolution, as explained by Sir William Blackstone, and shows why, in light of the constitutional custom giving legitimacy to the reign of William and Mary, and the present constitutional order of Canada under Elizabeth II, a reference to the Supreme Court cannot resolve the crisis now erupting in Quebec. The resolution of this crisis can only be accomplished by statesmanship, buttressed by patriotism and courage.

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)0.002
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 score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0240.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de droitSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207