MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173693669 · doi:10.21991/c9rm2r

The Assisted Human Reproduction Act Reference and the Thin Line Between Health and Crime

2013· article· en· W2173693669 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ubaka Ogbogu

Bibliographic record

VenueConstitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Systems and Judicial Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentLegislatureLegislationLawJurisdictionConstitutionGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceReproductionCriminal jurisdictionPower (physics)Human rightsPublic administrationPoliticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With respect to health, the Constitution Act, 1867 does not specifically assign legislative authority to any level of government. As a result, Parliament and provincial legislatures can enact laws relating to health. This inevitably leads to disputes between both levels of government over who has the authority to enact legislation to deal with whatever aspect of health is in question. However, it is now fairly well established that Parliament can regulate health using its criminal law power, among others, and that the provinces can do the same under various heads of provincial powers. The courts have also laid down a number of guiding principles to help delineate the legislative space occupied by each level of government in health and other subjects of shared jurisdiction. Still, controversy remains, as was the case in the Assisted Human Reproduction Act reference, which considered whether Parliament acted within its authority in using the criminal law power to enact provisions governing aspects of assisted human reproduction and related research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.278 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConstitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnelSame topicLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesFrench-language works237,207