MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240798702

Truth, Civility, and Religious Battlegrounds: The Contest between Religious Vilification Laws and Freedom of Expression

2006· article· en· W2240798702 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joel Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueTe Mata Koi : Auckland University Law Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivilityIslamCONTESTReligious freedomFreedom of expressionLawPolitical scienceFreedom of religionExpression (computer science)SociologyPoliticsTheologyHuman rightsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (Victoria, Australia) and the Canadian Criminal Act are examined through a study of 'Islamic Council of Victoria v Catch the Fire Ministries Inc' and 'R v Harding' cases, respectively. Their provisions that prohibit hate speech based on religious vilification are analyzed, suggesting that freedom of expression should be provided, trusting citizens to employ truth and civility in religious discourse.

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)0.000
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 score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

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 studies0.0010.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTe Mata Koi : Auckland University Law ReviewSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207