Not this Time: Canadians, Public Policy and the Marijuana Question, 1961–1975
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Not this Time: Canadians, Public Policy and the Marijuana Question, 1961–1975, Marcel Martel, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006, pp. x, 277. It is said of the 1960s, “If you can remember them, you weren't really there.” For those who need a refresher course, this book is an alternative to time travel. For the younger, post-1970s generation who literally were not there, this book tells them all they ever need to know about the history of Canada's marijuana laws and why they have been so resistant to change. Considering that nearly three quarters of this current crop of young adults has tried marijuana, according to the Canadian Addiction Survey of 2004, perhaps they should be asking why the drug of choice for so many is still illegal. Martel's detailed snapshot of this crucial 15-year period sets out the actors, forces and political pressures that are still very much a part of the ongoing and unresolved debate on drug policy reform in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".