MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mixed and Mixing Systems Worldwide: A Preface

2017· article· en· W2162799772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Seán Patrick Donlan

Bibliographic record

VenuePotchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of OxfordUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsScholarshipJurisdictionLawState (computer science)Political scienceThrivingInternational lawSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This issue of the Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (South Africa) sees the publication of a selection of articles derived from the Third International Congress of the World Society of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists (WSMJJ). That Congress was held at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel in the summer of 2011. It reflected a thriving Society consolidating its core scholarship on classical mixed jurisdictions (Israel, Louisiana, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Quebec, Scotland, and South Africa) while reaching to new horizons (including Cyprus, Hong Kong and Macau, Malta, Nepal, etc). This publication reflects in microcosm the complexity of contemporary scholarship on mixed and plural legal systems. This complexity is, of course, well-understood by South African jurists whose system is derived both from the dominant European traditions as well as from African customary systems, including both those that make up part of the official law of the state as well as those non-state norms that continue to be important in the daily lives of many South Africans.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePotchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese RegsbladSame topicConflict of Laws and JurisdictionFrench-language works237,207