MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066751805 · doi:10.1089/glr.2005.9.10

Games of Skill and Chance in Canada

2005· article· en· W2066751805 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGaming Law Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsSystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownloadVolume (thermodynamics)ManagementSociologyHumanitiesEconomicsComputer scienceArtWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaming Law ReviewVol. 9, No. 1 Original PapersGames of Skill and Chance in CanadaMichael D. Lipton, Morden C. Lazarus, and Kevin J. WeberMichael D. LiptonSearch for more papers by this author, Morden C. LazarusSearch for more papers by this author, and Kevin J. WeberSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:17 Feb 2005https://doi.org/10.1089/glr.2005.9.10AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 9Issue 1Feb 2005 InformationCopyright 2005, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.To cite this article:Michael D. Lipton, Morden C. Lazarus, and Kevin J. Weber.Games of Skill and Chance in Canada.Gaming Law Review.Feb 2005.10-18.http://doi.org/10.1089/glr.2005.9.10Published in Volume: 9 Issue 1: February 17, 2005PDF download

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.268 · 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