MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2265221031 · doi:10.60082/2817-5069.1469

Aboriginal Peoples and Mandatory Sentencing

2001· article· en· W2265221031 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Larry Chartrand

Bibliographic record

VenueOsgoode Hall law journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentCharterLawCriminal codePolitical scienceSection (typography)CriminologyCriminal lawSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author examines the impact of mandatory minimum sentencing on Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Emphasis is placed on the recently enacted mandatory minimum sentencing provisions for firearms offenses. The author argues that the enactment of such provisions are inconsistent with Parliament's objectives as reflected in section 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code which requires sentencing judges to pay "particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders." In addition, the author explores preliminary arguments to support a finding that mandatory minimum sentences applied to Aboriginal offenders violate sections 12 and 15 of the Charter.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
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
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOsgoode Hall law journalSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207